TheFrontPageCover
~ Featuring ~
liar-Pelosi: 'It's Not an 
Impeachment Resolution'
Nate Jackson  
.
Veteran intelligence correspondent 
Catherine Herridge leaving Fox News
by Vivek Saxena
{ bizpacreview.com } ~ Longtime Fox News chief intelligence correspondent Catherine Herridge is leaving the network to join CBS News as a senior investigative reporter... “Veteran journalist Catherine Herridge is joining CBS News as a Senior Investigative Correspondent based in Washington D.C.,” her new employer confirmed in a press release shared early Thursday morning. “In her new role at CBS News, which begins in November, she will report original investigations and cover national security and intelligence matters that impact the country.” “CBS News has always placed a premium on enterprise journalism and powerful investigations,” she herself said in a statement to CBS. “I feel privileged to join a team where facts and storytelling will always matter.” It’s not clear whether the statement was meant as a jab at Fox. It almost seemed as if she was suggesting that FNC doesn’t place “a premium on enterprise journalism and powerful investigations” and doesn’t think “facts and storytelling … always matter.” While this may seem conspiratorial, keep in mind that her departure comes only three weeks after her former Fox colleague, known liberal folk hero Shepard Smith, announced his abrupt resignation from the network. Note also that just like Smith, Herridge had been with Fox since its launch in 1996.  However, the two didn’t always get along. There were several instances where they butted heads over Herridge’s willingness to cover news stories that he as a liberal believed were irrelevant. One instance happened just last December. Her announcement likewise comes only days after Herridge won a Tex McCrary Award for excellence in journalism from the Congressional Medal of Honor Society...   https://www.bizpacreview.com/2019/10/31/veteran-intelligence-corres...   
Senator Chuck scumbag-Schumer’s ambitious proposal bucks basic economics—and science
by Mark P. Mills
{ city-journal.org } ~ New York Senator Chuck scumbag-Schumer has promised that if Democrats win the Senate in 2020. they’ll pass a law requiring that every car in America be electric by 2040... Chinese policymakers must be celebrating, because China makes the majority of the world’s batteries and has the most new battery factories under construction. The Chinese will need someone to buy all those batteries. This past summer, when China abandoned subsidies for electric vehicles (EVs), sales collapsed. China’s plan now is to require automakers to produce EVs, but at a paltry 3 percent to 4 percent of output. Perhaps Beijing will ultimately increase the allocation, but truly revolutionary technologies never require governments to order their adoption. As for scumbag-Schumer’s plan, it will fail on every front—including saving China’s battery industry. Let’s start with what consumers want. SUVs and pickups now account for 70 percent of all vehicles purchased. Most people, it seems, like big vehicles. The minority who buy purely for economy choose small cars with gasoline engines. This option, by the way, puts less carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than a Tesla. Consumers are price-sensitive in every category, a reality that politicians ignore at their peril. Batteries add about $12,000 to the cost of small and midsize cars. That’s meaningful for all consumers but the 1 percent. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, automobiles  constitute the most expensive category of consumables for the average household, costing twice that of health care. Housing is the biggest expense, but that’s not a consumable. A recent  McKinsey analysis suggests that automakers could “decontent” EVs to cut costs—that is, take out the extra features that every salesman knows are what sells cars. Setting aside details like cost and features, the key claim is that widespread use of EVs will reduce global carbon-dioxide emissions—except that it won’t, at least not meaningfully. First, it bears noting that regardless of Washington’s creative accounting, the all-EV-option would entail at least a $2 trillion cost to America’s economy, just in higher car costs. Then, simple arithmetic shows that this option wouldn’t even eliminate 8 percent of world oil demand. And the impact on global carbon-dioxide emissions would be even smaller...   https://www.city-journal.org/schumer-electric-cars?utm_source=City+...    
.
ISIS Confirms Baghdadi’s Death, 
Names New Leader
By TOBIAS HOONHOUT
{ nationalreview.com } ~ The Islamic State’s official propaganda outlet Amaq confirmed the death of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi on Thursday, five days after U.S. special forces executed a daring night raid in northwestern Syria that resulted in the ISIS leader’s death... According to SITE Intel Group, which monitors releases from ISIS, the terrorist group also confirmed the death of its former spokesman, Abu al-Hassan al-Muhajir — whom President Trump called Baghdadi’s “number one replacement” — in a different strike. ISIS named Abu Ibrahim Hashimi al-Quraishi, a name unknown by ISIS experts, as the group’s new leader. On Thursday, the Pentagon released details of the Baghdadi raid, along with pictures and video footage. “This operation was exquisitely planned and executed. It demonstrates the United States’ global reach and our unwavering commitment to destroy ISIS,” Marine General Kenneth McKenzie, the four-star chief of Central Command, told reporters. “. . . The individuals who planned and conducted this mission are quiet professionals, focused on their mission above glory or recognition. Committed people did hard, risky work, and they did it well.” The raid resulted in the deaths of six ISIS fighters, including Baghdadi. Aymenn al-Tamimi, a researcher at Swansea University focused on Islamic State, told Reuters that al-Quriashi could be a top figure called Hajj Abdullah, whom the U.S. State Department had identified as a possible successor to Baghdadi. “It could be someone we know, who perhaps has just assumed this new name,” Tamimi said.   https://www.nationalreview.com/news/isis-confirms-baghdadis-death-n...   
Why Is Vindman a War Hero but Flynn a Traitor?
By Daniel John Sobieski
{ americanthinker.com } ~ The network coverage of the testimony of National Security Council staffer Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman as a “bombshell” and “damning” was laughable and dishonest... implying that his service to his country wearing its uniform made him a credible and unbiased witness without a political agenda. Particularly egregious were the comments of NBC News anchor Lester Holt, who equated wartime courage with peacetime candor. As Newsbusters noted: After a report on the California wildfires, NBC Nightly News anchor Lester Holt told viewers “there was dramatic testimony in the House impeachment investigation by a decorated war hero who works on the National Security Council and was among those who heard that phone call between President Trump and his Ukrainian counterpart.” Except that others on the call between President Trump  and Ukrainian President, including those who were charged  with producing a transcript, don’t quite remember the call the way Vindman does. Certainly both participants on the call both said there was no pressure for Ukraine to “dig up dirt” on former Vice President loose lips liar-Joe Biden. As for the quid pro quo, we now know the Ukrainians didn’t learn until August military aid had been delayed. The phone call was in July. It’s hard to have a quid pro quo when the party being extorted is not told about the alleged quo. So just what was Vindman’s problem with the call? In his opening statement, Vindman says he came forward because he “did not think it was proper to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen.” Yet when pressed to explain where in the phone call transcript any demand was made, he lapsed into psychobabble about Ukrainian President Zelensky inferring a demand because of Trump’s more powerful position in the world. As Fox News reported: Vindman voiced concerns about the investigation request during his interview Tuesday, but was also questioned over his statement that it was not “proper to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen.” A source told Fox News that Vindman struggled for several minutes when asked to point to Trump’s language in the transcript that backed up the claim that it was a demand. Vindman later stated that Trump was the party with the most power, or "superior," so the "whole thing call was a demand asking for a favor." What? So why did Zelensky say he felt no pressure? Vindman’s testimony comes close to being as much of a fable about the call as was House Intelligence Committee Chairman scumbag-Adam Schiff’s opening statement before his committee making up what he claimed Trump meant and what Zelensky understood. Certainly 33-year military veteran Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn was not treated with the same deference when he became the focus of the deep state coup attempting to keep Donald Trump out of the White House. He served his country with genuine honor and distinction  He served both in Iraq and Afghanistan both for the Central Command and the Joint Special Operations Command which included units like Seal Team 6.  President scumbag/liar-nObama appointed him director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, where he served until he fell out of favor for his criticism of President scumbag/liar-nObama precipitously withdrawing from Iraq, which created a vacuum the Islamic State rose to fill, with scumbag/liar-nObama doing nothing as he watched it grow except dismiss it as the “JV team.”...  https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/10/why_is_vindman_a_w... 
Wonkish ex-Speaker Paul Ryan launches 
nonprofit to promote conservative policies
by David M. Drucker
{ washingtonexaminer.com } ~ Paul Ryan is tapping his Rolodex of wealthy Republican donors to fund a new political nonprofit organization committed to promoting the conservative policies... that drove the former House speaker’s legislative agenda over two decades in Congress. The American Idea Foundation, with headquarters located in Ryan’s hometown of Janesville, Wisconsin, is the Republican’s answer to the question of how to influence American public policy while in his political retirement. The organization plans to partner with academics, think tanks, and other groups to address poverty, drug addiction, education, upward mobility, and other reforms Ryan worked on in Washington. Ryan is the foundation’s president, with two longtime aides running it day to day. “I cannot wait to get started on this endeavor,” Ryan said in a statement. Ryan, 49, retired from Congress last year after 20 years representing a House district situated in southeast Wisconsin. He rose from being a young, obscure lawmaker to the Republican Party’s 2012 vice presidential nominee. His career, marked by support for reforming political third-rail entitlement programs Medicare and Social Security, included stints as chairman of the Budget Committee and Ways and Means Committee in the House and, eventually, as speaker. Ryan is a policy wonk and was much happier writing legislation than socializing with colleagues or raising money. But he understood that making policy required winning a majority in Congress — and that required raising money. Always a prodigious fundraiser, Ryan enlisted the GOP donors he cultivated during his vice presidential run and turned into a rainmaker for House Republicans. In the 2020 election cycle, Ryan has donated some of the money sitting in his old campaign committees, $650,000, to the National Republican Congressional Committee. Ryan also is headlining fundraisers for some of the Republicans he once led while speaker. Now, some of Ryan’s leftover campaign cash is being used to seed the America Idea Foundation, a 501(c)(3) group.
.
Ken Starr: History Will Not 
Be Kind to this Impeachment Process
by restoreamericanglory.com ~ In an interview with Fox News on Monday, former special prosecutor Kenneth Starr said that history would not be kind to congressional Democrats and their impeachment inquiry into President Trump... Starr condemned the Democrats for their lack of transparency, saying that this slide into secrecy would only do damage to the Constitution and the separation of government powers in Washington. “The text of the Constitution just entrusts impeachment to the good judgment – whether it’s being exercised or not – of the House of Representatives,” Starr said. “But history, I think, will not judge this well. It should judge it not well. Democrats didn’t have a full debate on the floor of the House, and that just lends itself to – ‘Then let’s go to court and have this litigated.’ And of course, the chairman then says, ‘you go to court, you’re in contempt.' Starr said it was critical for Democrats to move forward in a way that maintained at least the illusion of fairness and objectivity. “For scumbag-Adam Schiff to essentially declare guilt is another procedural irregularity,” Starr noted. “He should try his best to give the appearance of fairness and open-mindedness. He’s already declared the president substantively guilty, as well as procedurally guilty.” While House Speaker liar-Nancy Pelosi announced on Monday that she would finally bring the impeachment inquiry to a full House vote to “formalize the procedure,” Republicans have said it’s not enough to erase the damage done by 35 days of secret proceedings. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, Minority Whip Steve Scalise, and House Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows were among the many Republicans vowing not to put their stamp of approval on an already-ruined process. Asked Monday about the Department of Justice’s investigation into the origins of the Trump/Russia probe, Starr said Americans should keep an open mind about what charges might or might not develop. “During the Nixon years, we had an attorney general go to jail,” Starr recalled. “We’ve had FBI Directors who have been discredited. And that’s our system. We have checks and balances. Let’s not declare anyone guilty — as Chairman scumbag-Schiff just basically did. That’s incompatible with our system of fundamental fairness. But I believe there’s a housecleaning underway. If criminal charges are brought, we’ll be able to read the indictment, just as we did during the Mueller investigation. We can read those indictments, evaluate them and of course, see what happens.” The more we consider the timing of these two investigations – liar-Pelosi’s impeachment inquiry and the DOJ’s criminal investigation into the Russia probe – the more we’re convinced that these are not coincidental events. Democrats must surely know that the bill for their hoax is coming due, sooner than later. Their only option, save complete surrender, is to fight fire with fire. In other words: Cover up the first hoax with another one.
.
.
liar-Pelosi: 'It's Not an Impeachment Resolution'
Nate Jackson:  As we noted yesterday, House Speaker liar-Nancy Pelosi’s real impeachment gambit is to keep President Donald Trump under a cloud of investigation while putting Senate Republicans on the spot in 2020 for defending him. Thursday’s scheduled vote on the now-released resolution on impeachment is all about controlling the narrative — which liar-Pelosi inadvertently admitted by telling a reporter, “It’s not an impeachment resolution.”

House Majority scumbag-Steny Hoyer said the same thing: “This is not an impeachment resolution. I don’t know what an impeachment resolution is.”

If “it’s not an impeachment resolution,” what is it?

Well, it’s an effort to “address” Republican complaints about an opaque process by setting certain public rules about hearings. But it’s also literally a “keep doing what you’re doing” directive to Democrats:

Resolved, That the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Committees on Financial Services, Foreign Affairs, the Judiciary, Oversight and Reform, and Ways and Means, are directed to continue their ongoing investigations as part of the existing House of Representatives inquiry into whether sufficient grounds exist for the House of Representative to exercise its Constitutional power to impeach Donald John Trump, President of the United States of America.

Except there’s one glaring problem about those “ongoing investigations.” As The Federalist’s Sean Davis notes, “This liar-Pelosi non-impeachment resolution is hilarious. It goes out of its way to avoid authorizing a specific investigation and delegation of authority and instead repeatedly references an ‘investigation’ that under the rules of the House doesn’t even exist … because the House of Representatives never authorized one. And this resolution doesn’t either.”

Indeed, the bulk of the resolution is window dressing about transparency. For example, scumbag-Adam Schiff, chairman of the powerful House Intelligence Committee, can decide what “sensitive information” to redact from publicly released transcripts. Republicans can call witnesses … subject to approval from scumbag-Schiff. Remember, this is the guy who went out of his way to script the narrative with the so-called “whistleblower,” so no one should trust him.

In other words, the resolution is the Democrats’ version of putting on glasses and asking Republicans, “You wouldn’t hit a guy with glasses, would you?”

Even so, Democrats may not actually vote on this weak-sauce resolution. scumbagt-Hoyer waffled, “We’re going to have to consider whether or not it’s ready to go on Thursday.” The only thing that’s transparent is that this is a charade.

As for Tuesday’s testimony from National Security Council official Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman — a Ukrainian-born expert in U.S.-Ukraine relations — it illustrates the point about scumbag-Schiff’s gamesmanship. As Democrats have done before, Vindman’s opening statement was leaked so as to “bolster” the Democrats’ narrative. Yet with this carefully controlled script being all we have to follow, it’s hard to believe anything Democrats are saying.

Vindman is the first official to testify who actually listened to Trump’s July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. His “big reveal” was that the memorandum the White House released detailing the call omitted details — i.e., it wasn’t a true transcript. Specifically, Vindman says Zelensky explicitly mentioned Burisma Holdings — you know, the firm that paid Hunter Biden $850,000 despite his having no related energy experience.

Vindman said, “I did not think it was proper to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen, and I was worried about the implications for the U.S. government’s support of Ukraine.” He also says he brought his concerns to superiors, including requests to update the memorandum on the call, but without result.

Who did he speak to? Rep. Jim Jordan would like to know, except… “When we asked [Vindman] who he spoke to after important events in July — scumbag-Adam Schiff says, ‘No, no, no, we’re not going to let him answer that question.’”

Rep. Steve Scalise says of scumbagt-Schiff’s closed-door hearings, “He’s directing witnesses not to answer questions that he doesn’t want the witness to answer if they’re asked by Republicans. He’s not cut off one Democrat. He’s not interrupted one Democrat and told a witness not to answer Democrat members’ questions, but today he started telling witnesses not to answer questions by certain Republicans.”

Rep. Devin Nunes, the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, marveled, “I have never in my life seen anything like what happened today.” He accused scumbag-Schiff of “interrupt[ing] us continually to coach the witness, to decide … what we’re going to be able to ask the witness.” He added, “scumbag-Schiff is very good at coaching witnesses.”

But we’re supposed to trust scumbag-Schiff to run an honest impeachment inquiry after the House votes on a sham not-an-impeachment-resolution resolution?

Democrats desperately want Americans to believe that Trump’s query regarding the loose lips liar-Bidens’ corrupt dealings in Ukraine had more to do with benefiting the president’s reelection bid in 2020 than getting to the bottom of Democrat shenanigans in Ukraine related to the 2016 election. In other words, they insist, Trump’s supposed quid pro quo was corrupt and politically motivated. Consider, however, that Democrat corruption and soliciting foreign election interference is why this Ukraine fiasco and the now-defunct Russia-collusion hoax got started in the first place. Exposing Democrats would necessarily benefit Trump in 2020. That doesn’t make him corrupt.   ~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/articles/66446?mailing_id=4620&utm_mediu...  

Views: 7

Comment

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

Join Tea Party Command Center

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

ALERT ALERT

Joe Biden Vows: Give Taxpayer-Funded Obamacare To All Illegal Aliens In U.S.

Former Vice President and 2020 Democrat presidential primary candidate Joe Biden is vowing to give Obamacare, funded by American taxpayers, to all 11 to 22 million illegal aliens living in the United States.

During an interview with Telemundo’s Jose Diaz-Balart, Biden forgot that Obamacare technically bans illegal aliens from enrolling in healthcare plans — although illegal aliens are still able to obtain subsidized and free healthcare at Americans’ expense — and promised that under his plan, all 11 to 22 million illegal aliens would be able to get Obamacare.

The exchange went as follows:

DIAZ-BALART: When I … NBC moderated that first debate with you, I didn’t … I don’t recall a clear answer, under your plan should … would the 11, 12 million undocumented immigrants that live in the United States, that have been here many for generations, would they have access …

BIDEN: Yes.

DIAZ-BALART: — to health insurance.

BIDEN: Yes, they … if they can buy into the system like everybody else.

DIAZ-BALART: Because you know, in [Obamacare] they can’t.

BIDEN: Yeah. Yeah, I know. Well they can, that’s my point. They continue to be able to do that.

DIAN-BALART: They cannot under the ObamaCare.

BIDEN: Well and that’s my point, they will though. They will be able to buy into … [illegal aliens] would be able to buy in, just like anyone else could.

Biden joins Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), and South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg — among other 2020 Democrats — in committing to forcing American taxpayers to pay for healthcare for illegal aliens who arrive in the U.S.

Already, due to loopholes, American taxpayers are spending nearly $20 billion every year to provide illegal aliens with subsidized healthcare, emergency room visits, and other health services.

Under the 2020 Democrats’ plan to provide taxpayer-funded healthcare to all illegal aliens living in the U.S., Americans would be billed potentially $660 billion every decade just to cover the costs. Other research has found that the plan would cost Americans at least $23 billion every year.

As Breitbart News has reported, experts have said that giving taxpayer-funded healthcare to effectively all foreign nationals who can make it to America’s borders would drive “strong incentives for people with serious health problems to enter the country or remain longer than their visas allow in order to get government-funded care.”

Despite 2020 Democrats’ continued push for taxpayer-funded healthcare for illegal aliens, American voters are overwhelmingly opposed to the plan. The latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News survey revealed that the healthcare-for-illegal-aliens plan is the least popular policy position, with opposition from 62 percent of U.S. voters.

Similarly, a CNN poll from July discovered that 63 percent of likely swing voters oppose providing healthcare to illegal aliens, along with nearly 6-in-10 of all likely U.S. voters and 61 percent of moderates. A Rasmussen Reports survey also found that likely voters, by a majority of 55 percent, oppose giving healthcare to even the most low-income illegal aliens.

Infantilization of Popular Culture

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service