TheFrontPageCover
~ Featuring ~
A Case Study in Leftist Mockery of Marriage
Thomas Gallatin  
.
How the Senate Should Handle Impeachment
By Sally Zelikovsky
{ americanthinker.com } ~ When Senate Republicans drafted a resolution condemning the House for hearing witness testimony behind closed doors while excluding Republicans in violation of the President’s Due Process rights... beyond the scrutiny of cross examination and the rules of evidence, and then demanded the House conduct a formal vote and provide Due Process protections as well as minority participation, cheers rang out among rank and file Republicans: Senate Republicans finally threw away their tiddlywinks and actually stepped things up by bringing a knife to the Democrats’ gun fight!  Not unsurprisingly, the positive yields from punching back versus simply taking it have been immediate with Speaker liar-Nancy Pelosi feeling so backed into a corner that she has been forced to formalize the impeachment process in her own resolution, set to be voted on this week. All this in a matter of hours. But a knife at a gun fight won’t cut it. It’s time for Senate Republicans to take this one step further and launch a pre-emptive strike that will nuke anything the House does.  This is, after all, political war and we are fighting for our very survival. The Constitution is very clear. “The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.” Any such trial shall be under “Oath and Affirmation.” If it involves the President, “the Chief Justice shall preside” and conviction requires 2/3 of the members present. That’s about it. The Constitution and existing law have precious little to say about the actual Senate trial, if and how it should take place. The Senate is a check on the People’s House run amok -- quite literally a last stand against the barbarian mobs frothing at the gate. What we are witnessing today with the Democrats intent on crafting from whole cloth some kind of tenuous basis for Trump’s impeachment, is just that. And so Senate Republicans have to go on offense. They have to be keen, strategic, and creative. Think of it as our D-Day. The Senate clearly has jurisdiction to conduct a trial and remove the President, but is by no means constitutionally mandated, or even obligated, to conduct a trial. Like any court, the Senate has broad discretion in deciding whether or not to hear a case, and courts have a multitude of reasons to dismiss a case -- among others, a failure to state a claim, no facts at issue, frivolous claims, and on and on. The Senate should change its rules or enact new rules establishing that it will summarily dismiss any impeachment from the House and not hold a trial, when that impeachment is based on any of the following: partisan politics this can be proven since impeachment has been their clarion call since Election Night 2016; conduct that falls squarely within the executive’s constitutionally-enumerated powers among others, the executive’s ability to conduct foreign and national security policy, to protect the homeland, and to fully execute the laws of the United States, including investigating and prosecuting corruption carried out by citizens; hearsay evidence and any other evidence that would be inadmissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence; information protected by executive privilege or that is classified; evidence that has been obtained in violation of the accused’s constitutional guarantees or any other laws; or evidence that was illegally obtained... 
.
scumbag-Schiff Directing Witnesses 
Not To Answer GOP Questions
By Tristan Justice
{ thefederalist.com } ~ House Intelligence Committee Chairman scumbag-Adam Schiff, D-Calif., who is overseeing the ongoing illegitimate impeachment inquiry set in motion by Speaker liar-Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. ... is reportedly telling witnesses testifying not to answer questions asked by Republican lawmakers. Speaking to reporters on Capitol Hill, House Minority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., slammed the hidden process claiming scumbag-Schiff was instructing witnesses testifying behind the closed doors of the SCIF not to answer questions asked by Republican members. “He’s directing witnesses not to answer questions that he doesn’t want the witness to answer if they’re asked by Republicans,” Scalise charged. “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.”One question that scumbag-Schiff barred a witness from answering reportedly came from Ohio Republican Congressman Jim Jordan, who asked Vindman to disclose the individuals with whom he shared information about the July 25 phone call between President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymr Zelensky. “scumbag-Adam Schiff says, ‘no-no-no we’re not going to let him answer that question,’” Jordan said as reported by Fox News. The latest charges against scumbag-Schiff come as the ongoing impeachment process has been wrought with allegations of bias where scumbag-Schiff has been conducting a closed-door investigation interviewing witnesses whose testimony has been selectively leaked to the press to frame the president. The secrecy of the House proceedings followed by an array of leaked testimony to promote a false narrative being peddled by the corporate media prompted about 30 House Republicans led by Rep. Matt Gaetz, D-Fla., to storm the SCIF to demand previously denied records relating to the investigation. scumbag-Schiff is blocking GOP lawmakers from asking critical questions in the proceedings two days before liar-Pelosi has set a tentative full-chamber vote to formalize the impeachment inquiry...   https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/29/schiff-directing-witnesses-not... 
.
GOP will call scumbag-Adam Schiff as witness
in sham impeachment inquiry,
Gaetz warns Dems
by Tom Tillison
{ bizpacreview.com } ~ Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., said Republicans will call Rep. scumbag-Adam Schiff, D-Calif., who’s heading up the Democratic Party’s “sham” impeachment inquiry as chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, as a fact witness... In an appearance on Fox Business Network’s “Lou Dobbs Tonight,” Gaetz continued his efforts to push back on the opposition party’s secret impeachment proceedings taking place in the basement of the U.S. Capitol, slamming the process as “totally antithetical to our constitutional principles.” “The one mistake they’ve made — and I don’t know if they know this yet — scumbag-Adam Schiff has now made himself a fact witness and we intend to call him as a witness in the Judiciary Committee,” the lawmaker said.  “He said he’s like the Ken Starr, he’s the independent counsel,” Gaetz said. “Well, if that’s true and he’s able to do this secretive investigation, then we have not only a right but an obligation to call scumbag-Adam Schiff as a witness and Rep. Doug Collins said that’s precisely what we are going to do in the House Judiciary Committee.  “And then we’ll really see him squirm,” he added.  The current impeachment inquiry centers on the president’s call to Ukraine, and the whistleblower who raised concerns about the call had contacted Schiff’s staff on the House Intel Committee before filing a complaint. A decision that could subject this individual to felony false statement charges for not disclosing that he had contacted scubag-Schiff. A whistleblower who has ties to 2020 Democratic presidential candidate loose lips liar-Joe Biden, who is at the center of the controversy. And the whistleblower’s attorney has requested that he testify to Congress in writing, rather than appearing in person — if Democrats have him testify at all...  https://www.bizpacreview.com/2019/10/30/gop-will-call-adam-schiff-a...  
.
 Judge Tells Government To Respond To 
Allegations It Hid Evidence From 
Michael Flynn’s Legal Team 
By Margot Cleveland
{ thefederalist.com } ~ Late last week, Michael Flynn’s star attorney Sidney Powell filed a much-anticipated brief on the public docket detailing evidence that federal prosecutors had withheld from her client... Powell’s brief, which also exposed the FBI’s plot to set up Trump’s then-national security advisor, dominated conservative media coverage for several days and prompted a Twitter thread from President Trump quoting the brief at length and calling the targeting of Flynn “a disgrace.” Then, just as the noise began to quiet, Judge Emmett Sullivan—the federal judge presiding over the Flynn criminal case—issued a surprise order. “In view of the parties’ comprehensive briefing concerning Defendant’s Motion to Compel Production of Brady Material, the Court cancels the motion hearing previously scheduled for November 5, 2019,” the short minute order issued on Monday read. Court watchers promptly speculated on the significance of the order. It could mean one of two things. It could mean Sullivan had found the briefing sufficiently clear to allow him to render a decision on Powell’s motion to compel without the benefit of oral argument by the parties. Or it could mean that the briefing was so detailed that Sullivan needed more time to study the arguments before engaging with counsel and intended to reschedule the hearing for later. While Powell appeared undaunted by Judge Sullivan’s order canceling the November 5, 2019, hearing, the government’s immediate filing of a document cast as a “Notice of Claims Raised and Relief Sought for the First Time In A Reply Brief” suggests federal prosecutors feared Sullivan had made up his mind—and not in their favor. In their filing, the government complained that Flynn’s reply brief “seeks new relief and makes new claims, based on new arguments and new information.” “Issues may not be raised for the first time in a reply brief,” federal prosecutors stressed, before suggesting that “by making new arguments for the first time in his Reply, the defendant has potentially placed this Court in the position of reviewing novel assertions and arguments that the defendant claims are essential to his cause without the benefit of the government’s factual responses and legal analysis.”...
.
Israel Blocks Terrorists,
Palestinians Block Critics
by Bassam Tawil
{ gatestoneinstitute.org } ~ For the past few months, Palestinians have been accusing  Facebook of "waging war on Palestinian content" by suspending dozens of accounts belonging to Palestinian activists... and groups suspected of anti-Israel incitement and promotion of terrorism. The Palestinians even went as far as accusing the social media giant of being in collusion with Israel to "suppress the Palestinian narrative and conceal the reality of Israeli crimes." In the context of the campaign, the Palestinians used the hashtag #FBblocksPalestine to "reveal the double-standard policy of Facebook management in dealing with Israeli and Palestinian incitement on its site," according to the Palestinian NGO Sada Social Center. Earlier this month, Facebook further angered Palestinians when it deleted the page of the Hamas-affiliated Palestinian Information Center. Several Palestinian journalists, political activists and Hamas officials  accused Facebook of serving as a "tool of suppression" in the hands of Israel. The London-based group, ImpACT International for Human Rights Policies, claimed that Israel was exploiting its relations with Facebook to "combat Palestinian content." The group also claimed that the war on Palestinian content was attributed to "economic interests" between Israel and Facebook. The past week, however, has shown that if anyone is waging war on Palestinian content, it is the Palestinians themselves. While Facebook has been deleting pages of individuals and groups promoting terrorism, violence and hate speech, particularly against Israel, the leaders of the Palestinian Authority (PA) are now seeking to block dozens of websites and social media pages for a different reason: to prevent them from criticizing and exposing corruption cases related to PA President Mahmoud Abbas and his senior officials in the West Bank. On October 17, the PA Magistrate's Court in Ramallah, the de facto capital of the Palestinians, issued an order to block 59 websites and social media pages for allegedly "disrupting public order and provoking public opinion." The controversial order, which has sparked widespread criticism, was issued at the request of PA Attorney General Akram al-Khatib...   https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15077/palestinians-internet-cens... 
State Department Official Demanded
 Kurds Capitulate to Islamists
by John Rossomando
{ investigativeproject.org } ~ First, the United States agreed to withdraw special operations forces from a section of northeastern Syria, opening the door to a Turkish invasion aimed... at U.S.-allied Kurdish, Arab and Syriac Christian forces there who played a key role in defeating ISIS. Now, the State Department is demanding that those vulnerable Kurds work with Islamist forces who support the very Turkish onslaught that places them in harm's way. A top State Department official made the demand last week during a meeting with Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Council (SDC) leaders, said an SDC source who was present. The Kurds were told to capitulate politically to the Muslim Brotherhood-dominated National Coalition of Syrian Revolution and Opposition Forces (ETILAF). That means the Kurds will not get any say in negotiations over Syria's future, but Islamists will. ETILAF is based in Istanbul and closely follows the Turkish party line, including endorsing Turkey's invasion which aims to ethnically cleanse Kurds from a swath of northern Syria. It is dominated by members of Syria's Muslim Brotherhood who support a theocratic future for Syria, and have supported al-Qaida-aligned jihadists in Syria. President scumbag/liar-nObama recognized  ETILAF as the legitimate representative of the Syrian people in 2012 even though it controls no ground in Syria. In contrast, the SDC controlled a third of Syria's territory prior to Turkey's invasion two weeks ago...  https://www.investigativeproject.org/8137/state-department-official...   
.
A Case Study in Leftist Mockery of Marriage
Thomas Gallatin:  On Sunday, freshman Rep. Katie Hill (D-CA) resigned following accusations of sordid affairs with both campaign and congressional staffers. She denied having an affair with her legislative director, Graham Kelly, though, as we noted last week, Hill openly embraced bisexuality and was unapologetic about a two-year polyamorous relationship between herself, her soon-to-be ex-husband, and a young female campaign staffer.

According to The Washington Post, “Under House ethics rules adopted last year in response to high-profile sexual harassment claims involving members of Congress, it is against the official code of conduct for members to ‘engage in a sexual relationship with any employee’ who works for the member.” Thus, Hill’s #MeToo violations triggered an investigation by the House Ethics Committee, and she must have known she was toast.

Ultimately, however, it should come as no surprise to anyone that Hill felt free to behave in such an immoral manner following the Left’s success in officially redefining marriage itself. While leftists do not have a monopoly on the denigration of marriage, they have made a mockery of the God-given foundational societal institution through their self-described prideful debauchery.

Well, as Scripture warns, “Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, this he will also reap.” Hill’s mockery of marriage has now brought her short political career to an abrupt end. In her resignation announcement, Hill stated, “It is with a broken heart that today I announce my resignation from Congress. This is the hardest thing I have ever had to do, but I believe it is the best thing for my constituents, my community, and our country.” We hope Hill will use this experience to do some deep soul searching to reevaluate her views on marriage, sexuality, and truth. But we’re not holding our breath.

There is a warning in this to our nation at large. The more Americans sow or embrace and celebrate deviancy and immorality, the more certain it will be that we will reap greater national corruption both culturally and governmentally, costing us many of the blessings of Liberty. Let Hill serve as a sobering reminder that no matter what political party you belong to, there is One who judges all equally without prejudice or preference, to whom we all must ultimately answer.   ~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/articles/66391?mailing_id=4614&utm_mediu... 

Views: 8

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

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