TUCSON, Ariz. — Kevin McCarthy began to build the case for Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas’ impeachment this week with the California lawmaker’s first trip to the border as House speaker. Talking to reporters, with the southeast Arizona border wall serving as his backdrop, McCarthy outlined the myriad crises plaguing the nation due to unchecked migration and charged the DHS secretary with lying to the public.
“Our border, we don’t even have operational control of it anymore,” McCarthy said. “This is why I will continue to investigate what has gone wrong here and we will hold people accountable. And that includes Secretary Mayorkas.”
In an exclusive interview with The Federalist after the press conference, McCarthy offered no timeline for a potential impeachment inquiry and maintained that the process depends on what lawmakers find over the coming weeks.
“You never do impeachment for political purposes,” McCarthy said. “If something rises to that level,” he explained, “we will follow it wherever it goes.”
McCarthy led the congressional delegation with four GOP freshman, kicking off what will be a top priority for the new Republican majority under the second half of President Joe Biden’s term. Every House committee is expected to visit the southwest border in the ensuing months. Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., already introduced an article of impeachment against the DHS chief on Feb. 1.
In November, McCarthy demanded that Mayorkas resign over the border crisis or face impeachment in the lower chamber once Republicans took over. Mayorkas has remained defiant while the cartels run rampant. A coalition of 21 attorneys general sent a letter to the Biden administration last week demanding that Mexican drug cartels be designated as terrorist organizations.
Days before the speaker’s border trip this week, DHS staffed up to face House impeachment proceedings, entering a multimillion-dollar contract with a liberal law firm that has a history of left-wing donations.
“You cannot tell us this is secure when more than 42 percent of gottaways come through here,” McCarthy said on Thursday. “You cannot tell us this border’s secure when now there is enough fentanyl in this country to kill every single American more than 20 times over.”
“This has got to stop,” the speaker added. “And it starts with the secretary of Homeland. Stop lying to the American public. Tell them the truth [about] what’s happening and change back the regulation that we had before so our border can be secure.”
The White House hit McCarthy’s border trip as a partisan publicity stunt with a Wednesday statement. “Solutions are what President Biden is focused on, and his is plan working,”said Ian Sams, a White House spokesman. “House Republicans would be wise to join him to work together to strengthen our immigration system and fund border security.”
Biden’s first border visit was a sanitized tour in January, with officials clearing the camps in El Paso before the president’s arrival. Biden proceeded to call on Congress to pass immigration reform at his annual State of the Union last week and claimed his border measures were working.
“We’ve launched a new border plan last month. Unlawful migration from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela has come down 97 percent as a consequence of that,” Biden said. “But American border problems won’t be fixed until Congress acts.”
ACTS ON WHAT????????? Fund what???????? The Wall has been funded since Clinton. Finish the Wall. We’ve got the materials. Put it up.
Contrary to his claims the border is secure, data from Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shows otherwise.
Law enforcement reported more than 156,000 migrant encounters in January. While lower than the record of nearly 252,000 encounters in December, 156,000 is still higher than the almost 155,000 in January last year and the 78,000 the same month in 2021 — and way higher than the less than 37,000 in FY 2020. In fact, it’s an all-time high for the coldest month of the year. Even bundled-up reporters shivered under cloudless skies in the high desert winds when lawmakers ran late on Thursday.
A Deadly Crisis
While the Biden administration tries to argue there’s nothing to see on the southern border, Alex Espinosa, the director of a funeral home 15 miles east of McCarthy’s press conference, says otherwise.
“During Trump’s administration, I picked up four border crossers,” Espinosa told The Federalist in his conference room overlooking the border wall. “Right now, I can’t even tell you how many. There’s more deaths. Way more deaths.”
Most, Espinosa said, die from exposure to the elements or fentanyl. He explained the numbers picked up “right after Biden won.”
“Never, never, never, ever have I seen it this bad,” Espinosa told The Federalist. “I’ve probably buried 40 kids.”
A reformed ex-convict himself, Espinosa, 61, served time behind bars for drug smuggling 30 years ago. He now hands out free Narcan, a medication known to save lives in the case of opioid overdose, at services, saying it has become a hot commodity. The local health department replenished his stockpile after it ran out during a single funeral for a recent 23-year-old who overdosed. His own son has also struggled with opioid addiction.
In Naco, a town on the border five miles south of Espinosa’s funeral home, locals were shy about the crisis. A ranch hand working in a field with a pair of day laborers from across the border offered only his first name, Greg, and said he often sees helicopter activity but described the overall area as tame. Another pair of women operating a local nonprofit in the community denied the area even faced issues.
Espinosa, however, who conducts the funerals for the border crisis victims, said locals often feel too intimidated to speak openly about the dangers their neighborhoods face. Despite his Mexican heritage, Espinosa has been tarred as a racist, and his truck was burned after he challenged the mayor of Douglas over the leader’s plans to declare the border town a sanctuary city.
“They need to finish the wall,” Espinosa said frankly, warning that until then, the area would not be safe to walk around at night.
McCarthy told The Federalist on Thursday at the conclusion of his congressional tour that DHS needs to complete the wall with modern technology as originally planned.
“You gotta finish this,” McCarthy said, pointing at the wall. “Finish the technology you haven’t hooked up — the lights, the sensors. There’s places in the wall that’s not done yet.”
Tristan Justice is the western correspondent for The Federalist and the author of Social Justice Redux, a conservative newsletter on culture, health, and wellness. He has also written for The Washington Examiner and The Daily Signal. His work has also been featured in Real Clear Politics and Fox News. Tristan graduated from George Washington University where he majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow him on Twitter at @JusticeTristan or contact him at Tristan@thefederalist.com. Sign up for Tristan’s email newsletter here.
Remember when House Democrats accused former President Donald Trump of pressuring Ukraine to investigate then-candidate Joe Biden while leveraging military aid as collateral during a phone call with Ukraine’s president in 2019? I do. The accusation prompted Trump’s first impeachment on the grounds of “abuse of power” and “obstruction of Congress” that December, according to the U.S. Sun.
Now, two years later, it’s President Joe Biden who’s responsible for talks with world leaders, talks like the one House Democrats used to attack Trump. And, to afford Biden similar scrutiny to what Trump received, one particular aspect of Biden’s last call with now-former Afghanistan President Ashraf Ghani seems especially interesting.
Biden’s final call with Ghani came on July 23 — three weeks before Kabul fell to Taliban forces and Islamic extremism toppled 20 years of democratic progress in the country. The two discussed “military aid, political strategy and messaging” for approximately 14 minutes, Reuters reported on Tuesday after reviewing what it said was a transcript and audio of the exchange provided by an anonymous source. One particular aspect of the leaked transcript appears especially damning for Biden, as the New York Post pointed out.
The Post noted the transcript shows Biden “pressured” Ghani to “‘create the perception’ that the Taliban weren’t winning, ‘whether it is true or not.’”
“I need not tell you the perception around the world and in parts of Afghanistan, I believe, is that things are not going well in terms of the fight against the Taliban,” Biden said during the call, according to Reuters.
“And there is a need, whether it is true or not, there is a need to project a different picture.”
Biden’s pressuring went a step further, however, according to Reuters.
If Ghani could successfully fool the public into thinking the Afghan government had plans to control what Reuters called the “spiraling situation” of the Taliban’s resurgence, Biden would offer aid.
“We will continue to provide close air support, if we know what the plan is,” Biden said, according to Reuters.
The outlet added that, just days before the call, the U.S. supported Afghan security forces with air strikes against the Taliban. The Taliban maintained that these air strikes violated the Doha peace agreement signed under the Trump administration.
To provide some context, the Taliban had already advanced into approximately half of Afghanistan’s district centers at the time of the phone call, the Post noted. Just three weeks later, the nation’s capital would be directly threatened by Taliban forces. Ghani fled just before the city fell. But before that would happen, Biden advised Ghani during their exchange to employ prominent Afghan political and military figures — including former Afghan President Hamid Karzai — to further generate the sense of security, the Post added.
“That will change perception, and that will change an awful lot, I think,” Biden said, according to Reuters.
At another point in the conversation, Biden said a change in the Afghan government’s strategy would do more than help “on the ground,” Reuters reported. It would generate support for the Ghani regime internationally.
“I’m not a military guy, so I’m not telling you what that plan should precisely look like, you’re going to get not only more help, but you’re going to get a perception that is going to change,” he said, according to Reuters.
It was never OK to give Afghans or our allies a false sense of security in light of the danger steadily progressing across the country.
Afghan civilians and U.S. allies alike (particularly those in Europe) have since succumbed to a grim reality in one way or another — either being forced to flee their homes, scramble to return to their home countries (if residing there on behalf of another nation) or stay behind in the Taliban’s wake.
And it makes our president look like a liar.
Now, as September begins, the aftermath of the U.S.’s botched withdrawal from Afghanistan seems clearer every day.
Our allies are furious with us, Gold Star families mourn the loss of our 13 heroes killed in action during an ISIS suicide bombing outside of Kabul’s Hamid Karzai International Airport and several Americans and U.S. allies have since been left behind in the region.
We can only expect things to get worse from here.
Amid the bombshell leaked transcript of Biden and Ghani’s exchange that’s likely to make headway in the news, it’s reasonable to wonder whether Biden’s coercion and deception will stick to his image or roll off his shoulders as if he’s covered in Teflon.
Considering the establishment media’s — and our elected officials’ — histories of handling Biden with kid gloves, the likely answer is already clear.
Taylor Penley is a political commentator residing in Northwest Georgia. She holds a BA in English with minors in rhetoric/writing and global studies from Dalton State College. As a student, she worked in government relations and interned for Georgia’s 14th congressional district. She previously published an article with Future Female Leaders and published her rhetorical analysis of President Reagan’s Berlin Wall Speech in a collegiate journal. She seeks to study journalism or communication in graduate school.
Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated– $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and shared by President Donald Trump.
Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated– $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and shared by President Donald Trump.
Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated– $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and shared by President Donald Trump.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and a majority of Republicans voted Tuesday in favor of Republican Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul’s motion to dismiss the impeachment trial against former President Donald Trump. As senators prepared for the impeachment trial, Paul introduced a motion arguing that the trial is unconstitutional since Trump is now a private citizen and exempt from facing removal from office. However, five Republican senators and every Senate Democrat voted to table the motion, pushing Trump’s impeachment trial forward.
THESE FIVE GOP SENATORS VOTED TO TABLE THE MOTION:
Maine Sen. Collins
Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski
Utah Sen. Mitt Romney
Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse
Pennsylvania Sen. Pat Toomey
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) heads to the Senate floor before being called into session on January 26, 2021 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Samuel Corum/Getty Images)
“I think there will be enough support on it to show there’s no chance they can impeach the president,” Paul told reporters before the vote. “If 34 people support my resolution that this is an unconstitutional proceeding, it shows they don’t have the votes and we’re basically wasting our time.” (RELATED: Rand Paul Will Force Vote On The Constitutionality Of Trump’s Upcoming Senate Trial)
WASHINGTON, DC – NOVEMBER 19: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) speaks during his weekly press conference at the U.S. Capitol on November 19, 2019 in Washington, DC. Republicans spoke about their desire to work on their legislative agenda despite the impeachment hearings in the House. (Photo by Alex Edelman/Getty …
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) on Tuesday spoke about the major breach that occurred at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, stating that the mob was “fed lies” and “provoked” by President Trump, as well as others.
Speaking on the Senate floor on Tuesday, McConnell said that the “mob was fed lies” and “provoked by the president and other powerful people” — effectively echoing the claims made by his Democrat colleagues, who accuse Trump of inciting the chaos that descended upon the Capitol that day.
“The mob was fed lies. They were provoked by the president and other powerful people, and they tried to use fear and violence to stop a specific proceeding of the first branch of the federal government which they did not like,” the Kentucky Republican said.
“But we pressed on. We stood together and said an angry mob would not get veto power over the rule of law in our nation,” he continued:
McConnell’s remarks echo the statements made by many of his Democrat colleagues, who contend that Trump incited the violence despite the fact that he, at no point during his “Save America” speech, urged supporters to engage in lawless and violent acts. As the chaos unfolded, Trump — who at the time had access to his personal Twitter account — repeatedly called for protesters to respect law enforcement and refrain from violence.
“Please support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement. They are truly on the side of our Country. Stay peaceful!” he wrote on Twitter shortly after 2:30 p.m. Eastern.
Less than an hour later, the president wrote, “I am asking for everyone at the U.S. Capitol to remain peaceful. No violence! Remember, WE are the Party of Law & Order – respect the Law and our great men and women in Blue. Thank you!”
However, one week later, the House impeached Trump for the second time, with the single article asserting that Trump incited members of the crowd.
“President Trump gravely endangered the security of the United States and its institutions of Government He threatened the integrity of the democratic system, interfered with the peaceful transfer of power, and imperiled a coequal branch of Government,” the article states.
“He thereby betrayed his trust as President, to the manifest injury of the people of the United States,” it adds.
Ten House Republicans joined Democrats in supporting impeachment. While House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) openly opposed impeachment, he too suggested that Trump “bears responsibility for Wednesday’s attack on Congress by mob rioters.”
“He should have immediately denounced the mob when he saw what was unfolding,” he said on the House floor last week.
“These facts require immediate action of President Trump — accept his share of responsibility, quell the brewing unrest, and ensure President-elect Biden is able to successfully begin his term,” he continued.
McCarthy told House Republicans earlier this month that Trump “told him he bears some of the responsibility for the Washington, DC, riots,” as Breitbart News detailed.
McConnell has not revealed if he would vote to convict Trump in the Senate impeachment trial, stating that he intends to “listen to the legal arguments when they are presented to the Senate.” He has reportedly told colleagues that their decision will be a “vote of conscience.”
President Donald Trump called for his supporters to remain peaceful during the transition of power during the inauguration of President-elect Joe Biden in a statement released on Wednesday.
“In light of reports of more demonstrations, I urge that there must be NO violence, NO lawbreaking, and NO vandalism of any kind,” the president said in a statement to reporters that was first published by Fox News.
Trump reminded his supporters that he did not stand for violent protests amid reports that there were other uprisings planned around the country.
“That is not what I stand for, and it is not what America stands for,” he said. “I call on ALL Americans to help ease tensions and calm tempers.”
Trump’s message was released Wednesday afternoon as the House of Representatives, led by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, moved to impeach the president on the basis that he incited the mob of his supporters to attack Capitol Hill.
A senior Trump adviser told Fox News that the president wanted Big Tech companies to “join with him” to secure a peaceful transition of power.
“This is a critical time in our nation’s history and surely we can all come together to deliver this important message and not continue to play partisan politics,” the adviser told Fox News.
Denouncing partisan hypocrisy, Republican Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio slammed Democrats on Wednesday for their use of a double standard when it comes to objecting to an election.
Jordan spoke as the House moved forward with the process of impeaching President Donald Trump, citing last week’s Capitol incursion and Trump’s words and action before, during and after the violence. Jordan is among the Republicans opposing impeachment, which is likely to pass the House. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has said impeachment is unlikely to make it on the Senate calendar until after Trump’s term in office has ended.
Jordan said that Republicans who last week wanted to voice objections to the Electoral College vote that gave President-elect Joe Biden his victory were only doing something Democrats have done before.
Advertisement – story continues below
“In his opening remarks, the Democrat chair of the Rules Committee said that Republicans last week voted to overturn the results of an election. Guess who the first objector was on Jan. 6, 2017? First objector: the Democrat chairman of the Rules Committee,” Jordan said, referring to Democratic Rep. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts.
“And guess which state he objected to? Alabama. The very first state called. Alabama. President Trump, I think, won Alabama by like 80 points,” Jordan said, before consulting notes and saying that Trump in fact won the state by 30 points.
Jack Davis is a freelance writer who joined The Western Journal in July 2015 and chronicled the campaign that saw President Donald Trump elected. Since then, he has written extensively for The Western Journal on the Trump administration as well as foreign policy and military issues.
House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Devin Nunes (R-CA) during an interview on Sunday recalled how Republicans tried to hold a public hearing on the China threat in mid-2018, and Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) hijacked it to call for a subpoena of a Russian translator.
“The House Republicans have been running an investigation into China on the Intelligence Committee for many, many years…so we’ve been on this for awhile, and remember, we were dealing with the Russian hoax in Congress at the same time the House Republicans were trying to run an investigation into China,” he said on Fox and Friends.
“And the Democrats — finally we had a public hearing on this — and they hijacked the hearing to try to subpoena whatever Russian of the week they were looking after. So this has been a challenge for us, to get Russia on the forefront, and now, both Republicans and Democrats realize this,” he said.
Nunes was referring to the July 19, 2018, hearing on China held by Nunes, when he was the chairman of the Intelligence Committee. The hearing’s topic was “China’s threat to American government and private sector research and innovation leadership.” During the hearing, then-Ranking Schiff began his opening remarks, not on China, but with his concerns about President Trump meeting alone with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki, Finland, earlier that month, and then raised a motion to subpoena the interpreter who attended the meeting. The hearing then devolved into confusion over whether Schiff was able to raise that motion, forcing Nunes to call for a recess. The witnesses — four top China experts — were left to talk to committee staff and among themselves, as Breitbart News reported at the time.
After the recess, Republicans voted to table the motion. Schiff demanded a recorded vote.
“Schiff has decided to turn this hearing into a Russia clown show,” a house staffer said.
Schiff, or his staff, later tweeted about his failed attempt to subpoena the interpreter at the China hearing.
“BREAKING: @RepSwalwell and I just made a motion in House Intel Committee to subpoena the American interpreter during the summit — the only witness to Trump’s meeting with Putin. This is an extraordinary remedy, but Trump’s actions necessitate it. Republicans voted it down.”
Republicans also say Democrats’ singular focus on impeaching Trump also distracted Congress earlier this year, when the coronavirus spread. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) scheduled a vote on impeachment articles on Trump the same day the first person from Wuhan, China, arrived to the United States, on January 15. She passed out commemorative signing pens and encouraged Americans to watch the House impeachment managers bring the articles over to the Senate.
The White House stood up its coronavirus task force on January 29, and ordered a ban on travel from China on January 31, the same day the World Health Organization acknowledged that the coronavirus was a global health emergency. However, the Senate impeachment trial continued until February 5.
Follow Breitbart News’s Kristina Wong on Twitter or on Facebook.
W.H.O. and our mainstream media seem to be snuggling up with China against President Trump. The big question, will protecting Americans from the coronavirus be worse than the disease itself?
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.
While Democrats were diverting the attention and energy of the entire country into a pointless trial that could not possibly have ended in anything other than President Donald Trump’s acquittal, the coronavirus pandemic was beginning in China and arriving in the United States.
The timeline of the two developments — impeachment and coronavirus — is shocking, and reveals the true cost of hyper-partisanship.
January 11: Chinese state media report the first known death from an illness originating in the Wuhan market.
January 15: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) holds a vote to send articles of impeachment to the Senate. Pelosi and House Democrats celebrate the “solemn” occasion with a signing ceremony, using commemorative pens.
January 21: The first person with coronavirus arrives in the United States from China, where he had been in Wuhan.
January 23: The House impeachment managers make their opening arguments for removing President Trump.
January 23: China closes off the city of Wuhan completely to slow the spread of coronavirus to the rest of China.
January 30: Senators begin asking two days of questions of both sides in the president’s impeachment trial.
January 30: The World Health Organization declares a global health emergency as coronavirus continues to spread.
January 31: The Senate holds a vote on whether to allow further witnesses and documents in the impeachment trial.
January 31: President Trump declares a national health emergency and imposes a ban on travel to and from China. Former Vice President Joe Biden calls Trump’s decision “hysterical xenophobia … and fear-mongering.”
February 2: The first death from coronavirus outside China is reported in the Philippines.
February 3: House impeachment managers begin closing arguments, calling Trump a threat to national security.
February 4: President Trump talks about coronavirus in his State of the Union address; Pelosi rips up every page.
February 5: The Senate votes to acquit President Trump on both articles of impeachment, 52-48 and 53-47.
February 5: House Democrats finally take up coronavirus in the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Asia.
For twenty days, from the day the first death from coronavirus was known, Democrats did nothing about it. They were too busy with the president’s impeachment trial — a trial Pelosi had delayed unnecessarily for several weeks.
To the extent that they commented on coronavirus at all, it was only to tear up the president’s remarks or to call him a racist. They told the nation that he, not coronavirus, was a threat to the national security of the United States.
In the midst of that all-consuming trial, it is remarkable Trump was able to do anything else at all. But he did, and one of the things he did was impose the China travel ban, just one day after the World Health Organization declared coronavirus a global health emergency, and the day before the first victim of the pandemic died outside China.
For his trouble, he was criticized by the World Health Organization and called “hysterical” by his future 2020 rival.
When Republicans warned Democrats that impeachment was a waste of time, a divisive partisan exercise, and a distraction from the real issues facing the country — a lesson Republicans learned the hard way, in Bill Clinton’s impeachment, 21 years before — Democrats ignored them.
Just a few weeks later, our divided leaders were taken by surprise by the pandemic, and bickered on cable news, asking why nothing was done sooner.
But we know why.
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). He earned an A.B. in Social Studies and Environmental Science and Public Policy from Harvard College, and a J.D. from Harvard Law School. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.
John Bolton Admits Last-Minute Impeachment Leak Was A Publicity Stunt
Former National Security Advisor John Bolton admitted Wednesday that his testimony in President Donald Trump’s recent impeachment proceedings involving Ukraine would have had no impact on the trial’s outcome even after sections of his upcoming book leaked attempting to convict the president in its final days.
“People can argue about what I should have said and what I should have done,” Bolton said at Vanderbilt University Wednesday night during a forum with his predecessor Susan Rice, according to ABC News. “I will bet you a dollar right here and now my testimony would have made no difference to the ultimate outcome.”
“I sleep at night because I have followed my conscience,” Bolton added.
Rice challenged Bolton’s decision to remain silent throughout the process despite not ever being subpoenaed by the House or Senate in the proceedings.
“It’s inconceivable to me that if I had firsthand knowledge of a gross abuse of presidential power, that I would withhold my testimony,” Rice said. “I would feel like I was shamefully violating my oath that I took to support and defend the Constitution.”
Bolton argued that the House botched the process and condemned House Democrats for having committed “impeachment malpractice.”
“The process drove Republicans who might have voted for impeachment away from the president because it was so partisan,” Bolton claimed.
Bolton’s new book, “The Room Where It Happened: A White House Memoir,” is slated to be released next month is expected to reveal what Bolton might have said had he been forced to testify before lawmakers in the impeachment proceedings. Republicans in the Senate defeated Democrats’ efforts to bring Bolton before the upper chamber before the final vote with only Sens. Mitt Romney of Utah and Susan Collins of Maine voting in favor of the measure.
In the final days of the trial however, sections of Bolton’s upcoming book were leaked to the New York Times, featuring Bolton accusing Trump of tying the nearly $400 million in military aid to Ukraine with politically motivated investigations as Democrats alleged. The leak happened to come on the same day the book became available for online pre-order revealing the move as nothing more than a publicity stunt.
On Monday, Bolton accused the White House of trying to suppress details in the book in his first public remarks since the president’s exoneration at Duke University.
Tristan Justice is a staff writer at The Federalist focusing on the 2020 presidential campaigns. Follow him on Twitter at @JusticeTristan or contact him at Tristan@thefederalist.com.
The Speaker of the House Nancy got so mad during an interview on CNN you could almost see the smoke come out of her ears. When CNN’s Christiane Amanpour mentioned that President Trump was acquitted and his poll numbers were up, Pelosi interrupted and flew into a speech ripping rage.
“What about, though, the fact that the president seems liberated, and this is about democratic politics so I’m not asking you to criticize here, but he was acquitted, his poll ratings are high …” Amanpour said.
“You can’t have an acquittal unless you have a trial, and you can’t have a trial unless you have witnesses and documents. So he can say he’s acquitted, and the headlines can say ‘acquitted,’ but he’s impeached forever, branded with that, and not vindicated,” Pelosi continued.
“And even the senators were saying, ‘yes, it wasn’t right,’ but they didn’t have the courage to act upon that.”
President Trump is so in her head it’s not even funny, the look in Pelosi’s eyes when she said the President poll numbers are up and he’s been acquitted was hilarious. Nancy can spout her nonsense about President Trump not being acquitted but even House manager Rep. Jerry Nadler recently admitted that they (Democrats) knew from the beginning President Trump would never be removed from office. When Nadler was asked if he’s worried about backlash from voters as House Democrats continue to investigate President Trump post impeachment Nadler said that “we always knew” the President wouldn’t be removed from office.
“We always knew he was going to be acquitted by the Senate because we always knew that if the Republicans didn’t care about the evidence or anything else, they proved it by not being willing to see the witnesses, we knew that in advance,” Nadler said. “There were some people who said we shouldn’t impeach the president because of his given approval and expected acquittal by the Senate, no matter what the facts, that would help him politically.”
World Food Program USA Board Chairman Hunter Biden (L) and U.S. Vice President Joe Biden attend the World Food Program USA’s Annual McGovern-Dole Leadership Award Ceremony at Organization of American States on April 12, 2016 in Washington, DC. / Teresa Kroeger/Getty Images
According to CBS News’ sources, Department of Justice officials, at the direction of Attorney General William Barr, have been “quietly” reviewing over the past “several weeks” records and documents related to the “Ukraine matter,” including documents provided by Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani.
Citing a source familiar with the matter, CBS News’ Catherine Herridge and Clare Hymes reported Tuesday that “staff outside of Main Justice in Washington have been assigned by Attorney General William Barr to review the Ukraine matter, adding that the review is being handled by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Pittsburgh and is separate from U.S. Attorney John Durham’s probe into the origins of the FBI’s Russia probe.”
Among the materials reportedly being reviewed by Justice Department officials at Barr’s behest are some provided by Giuliani, who was specifically mentioned by President Trump in his famous July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, and who appears to have served as point man for the pursuit of investigations into allegations of corruption involving former Vice President Joe Biden, his son Hunter Biden, and Ukrainian energy company Burisma Holdings.
Herridge and Hymes note that that investigation also “goes beyond” matters related to the Bidens, according to the source.
In the call which sparked the Democrats’ impeachment campaign, President Trump asked Zelensky to “look into” the allegations involving the Bidens and Burisma. After a whistleblower complaint accused Trump of attempting to pressure Ukraine into investigating his political rival, Democrats launched an impeachment inquiry resulting in two articles of impeachment, which passed in the House but for which Trump was acquitted by the Senate.
As Herridge and Hymes reports, the allegations involving the Bidens and Ukraine “have gained new life” since Trump’s acquittal, with Barr stating Monday that the department has established an “intake process in the field” for material concerning Ukraine.
During the impeachment trial in the Senate, Trump’s lawyers repeatedly brought up the issue of corruption in Ukraine, around which Trump’s request to Zelensky centered. At one point, President Trump’s deputy counsel Patrick Philbin connected the “Ukraine matter” to the whistleblower whose complaint sparked the impeachment.
“If the whistleblower, as is alleged in some public reports, actually did work for then-Vice President Biden on Ukraine issues, exactly what was his role?” asked Philbin. “What was his involvement when issues were raised — we know from testimony that questions were raised — about the potential conflict of interest that the vice president then had when his son was sitting on the board of Burisma. Was the alleged whistleblower involved in any of that and in making decisions to not do anything related to that? Did he have some reason to want to put the deep-six on any question raising any issue about what went on with the Bidens and Burisma and firing Shokin and withholding a billion dollars in loan guarantees and enforcing a very explicit quid pro quo — you won’t get this billion dollars until you fire him? We don’t know. And because Manager [Rep. Adam] Schiff was guiding this whole process, because he was the chairman in charge of directing the inquiry and directing it away from any of those questions, that creates a real due process defect in the record that has been presented here.”
Trump has been acquitted of all articles of impeachment leveled by vicious, evil, and dirty leftist politicians, who care nothing for the American family.
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, the great El Rushbo, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.
Now that the opening arguments from the impeachment trial have ended and it has been moving forward with questions from the Senators, which is also coming to a close, we may be nearing the end of it all. Let us just take a step back and give credit where credit is due. I think we need to really appreciate the brilliance of the President’s legal team and how they ended their arguments.
In a very smart move from Pat Cipollone, the Democrats’ own words were used against them. Red State reported, one of the main things that made President Trump’s counsel’s presentation infinitely better than that of the House Democratic managers was the simple and honest way they presented the facts and logic and stuck to the fundamentals of the Constitution.
Pat Cipollone exemplified that again today as his argument came to a close. He noted the basic fact that the Democrat’s objective was to obscure, that the case and the articles of impeachment they have put forth simply do not meet the constitutional standard for impeachment. The Democratic articles are a threat to our justice system because they are not what the Framers intended impeachment to be. Cipollone said that if you look carefully to the words of the past that they were true then and they are still true today.
He then played the words of the Democrats which included present impeachment managers shaming against partisan impeachment in 1998.
“You were right,” Cipollone said. “But I’m sorry to say you were also prophetic. And I think I couldn’t say it better so I wouldn’t. You know what the right answer is in your heart. You know what the right answer is for our country. You know what the right answer is for the American people.”
To me, this is a total knock out to the Democrats. They are guilty of doing the very thing they spoke against during the 1998 Clinton impeachment trial.
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, the great El Rushbo, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, the great El Rushbo, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.
Trump defense team member and Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan reacts to House managers’ arguments during trial. House Freedom Caucus member Jim Jordan, R-Ohio., offered his assessment of President Trump’s Senate impeachment trial during a Thursday appearance on Fox News’ “The Ingraham Angle.”
Jordan said Lead Impeachment Manager Adam Schiff, D-Calif., is not proving Trump guilty of any crime, or any act that rises to the level of an impeachable offense, or one that would warrant his expulsion from office. He added that the case laid out by Schiff and his team amounts to little more than “assumptions, presumptions and hearsay.”
“They don’t have the facts,” he said. “They make things up. Frankly, it should not surprise us. Adam Schiff is the guy who told us for two years, ‘I have more than circumstantial evidence that President Trump worked with Russia to influence the election’. That was not true.”
He said Schiff has not been entirely forthright or accurate with details of the case. He said Schiff declared that a relevant 2016 FISA court process was adequate — but Inspector General Michael Horowitz ruled otherwise.
“Mr. Horowitz told us they lied to the FISA courts 17 times,“ Jordan said.
“Adam Schiff [also] said we would hear from the whistleblower.” To date, that has not happened.
“The facts are solidly on the president’s side,” he continued. “The Constitutional principles is on the president’s side and the unfair process is another great argument the White House can make because what they did in the House [impeachment inquiry] was very unfair to the president.”
Earlier Thursday, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., accused Trump of placing his own personal interests above national security and American democracy and charged that Trump was the only president in history to violate his oath of office so flagrantly.
“No president has ever used his office to compel a foreign nation to help him cheat in our elections. Prior presidents would be shocked to the core by such conduct and rightly so,” Nadler said in kicking off Day 3 of the trial.
“This conduct is not ‘America First,’”Nadler said, referring to one of Trump’s campaign themes. “It is Donald Trump first.”
Fox News’ Marisa Schultz contributed to this report.
Rudy Giuliani, the personal attorney for President Trump, threatened Thursday to go public with information that would expose corruption by 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden.
“Everything I tried to tell the press last March is now coming out, and more. I will now start to reveal the evidence directly to you, the People,” the former New York mayor tweeted.“The Biden Family Enterprise made millions by selling public office. Then when Joe was Obama’s Point Man, they ALL made millions.”
Giuliani’s claim that he could reveal evidence detrimental to the former vice president follows his offer to testify in Trump’s impeachment trial taking place in the Senate.
Viktor Shokin / LightRocket via Getty Images
“I would love to see a trial. I’d love to be a witness – because I’m a potential witness in the trial – and explain to everyone the corruption that I found in Ukraine, that far out-surpasses any that I’ve ever seen before, involving Joe Biden and a lot of other Democrats,” he said Sunday morning on “The Cats Roundtable” with radio host John Catsimatidis on AM 970.
Giuliani, who is at the center of the impeachment trial for his work on behalf of Trump in Ukraine, has alleged that Biden pressured Ukrainian officials to fire a top prosecutor by withholding millions in guaranteed loans.
He claims that Biden took the action against Viktor Shokin because he was going to investigate Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian company that employed Biden’s son Hunter on its board.
Joe Biden, during a campaign stop in Iowa on Wednesday, defended Hunter, saying “no one has suggested my son did anything wrong.”
“There’s nobody that’s indicated there’s a single solitary thing that he did that was inappropriate, wrong … or anything other than the appearance. It looked bad that he was there,” Biden said, according to the Washington Post. “He acknowledges that he in fact made a mistake going on the board.”
Rep. Adam Schiff, who is playing a lead role among House Democrats presenting the case against Trump, said Trump has been trying to pin corruption on the Bidens, noting that the president called for Ukraine and China to launch investigations into them. Schiff used as one example Trump’s comments from Oct. 3.
“They should investigate the Bidens. Because how does a company that’s newly formed and all these companies, if you look — and by the way, likewise, China should start an investigation into the Bidens. Because what happened in China is just about as bad as what happened with Ukraine,” Trump told reporters on the White House’s South Lawn.
The impeachment trial centers on a July 25 phone call in which Trump asked Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to launch an investigation into the Bidens that would personally benefit Trump politically.
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, the great El Rushbo, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.
I realize that many of you aren’t are not political junkies like me. You have gainful employment and can’t hear all that is going on in the Senate. Based on your comments, I know you are very interested, but only get snippets of information. So, I would like to add some of my observations of this entire Kabuki Theater being conducted by the Leftist. This is ONLY my perception and understanding.
When I make these observations in the past, I prefer to ask questions that hopefully inspire thought. Unlike the Leftist, I want you to think for yourself. So here we go;
Since President Clinton’s impeachment trial in 1998, the Left has been trying to get even for exposing their President to judgement. The Left talked many times about impeaching President Bush 43. Could all this be about “getting even”?
Starting with the possibility of President Trump running for President, the Left has been delirious with “not permitting” Trump to succeed as President.
Today a thought came to me, that President Trump doesn’t sound like a typical President, certainly unlike President Obama. His speech is pure “Bronx”, and his bluntness, while refreshing, can be too strong for those who ant someone else to think for themselves.
Remember how the Left talked about President Obama’s speaking? Did they sound to you as people worshiping a deity, not a man? Obama worship was, and remains, a very real thing.
Do your own research on every revolution that has taken place on earth. With the exception of a few, especially America’s Revolutionary War with Britain. The steps to take over are mostly the same.
Certain social leaders begin telling the people that reason for their suffering is that they are being oppressed by (?). In America, it’s been liberal college professors.
Soon, specific people are identified as their target and slang is developed to reduce those people to something less than human; hatred is pushed, and violence encouraged. The Left has been very divisive with “race”, the “have’s” verse the “have-nots”, “white privilege”, “Republicans”, “Conservatives”, “Christians”, “Pro Life”, “traditional marriage between one man and one woman”, LGBGQTRIDONTKNOW”, “Climate Change”; do I really need to go on?
Increase to heat of the rhetoric to include accusations against your opposition that make them appear to be militant about their prejudice.
Form groups to professionally demonstrate violently to sow terror in the hearts of the opposition
Come up with labels for your opposition that paint them as less than human, and not worth living (abortion, euthanasia, etc.).
Blame your opposition of doing things you are actually doing yourself.
Learn to persuade your constituents with carefully crafted “spin” of events, and do everything possible to control the narrative and debate.
Manipulate the laws so that your opposition can never win any election.
A great example is the move to eliminate the “Electoral College”. Those pushing for popular vote will give New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago total control of who is elected to office. Do you need reminders of which political ilk is the vast majority?
While your doing your research, study out why the Founders made sue to include The Electoral College in our Constitution.
There is so much more, and you will see that when you do your own research.
Where is America right now in this process?
Are we headed for a “Civil/Race/Economic/ War”?
Now the Leftist are spinning all their so-called evidence to impeach President Trump. I feel I need to remind you of what many of them have said on camera; They have admitted they are doing this because they can’t trust the American People to votes the way they want us to, so they have to take charge this way.
Are we too late?
Have we already reached the point of no return?
Will is take a civil war to make things right again?
Do you fellow believers in Christ really believe God can turn this all around?
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, the great El Rushbo, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been seen all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News” and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, and even the great El Rushbo.
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been seen all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News” and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, and even the great El Rushbo.
Impeachment: Do Republicans Have More Fun? / Source: AP Photo/Marcy Nighswander
Impeachments aren’t what they used to be. Today, young people are supposed to be excited that the president withheld taxpayer money from Ukraine — a half-billion-dollar foreign aid package that ticks off most Americans under any circumstances, going to a country notable for not being our country, and for a purpose other than the wall.
Now, Bill Clinton — that was an impeachment!
First, there was the corpus delicti of the case — a White House intern, Monica Lewinsky, earning her “presidential kneepads” by sexually servicing the president.
The telephonic evidence wasn’t about “Burisma Holdings Limited” or a Ukrainian prosecutor whose name no one can remember. It was tapes of Monica blathering on and on about servicing the president, including such fascinating items as:
— Clinton couldn’t remember Monica’s name after their first two sexual encounters;
— Monica’s suggestion to Clinton that she be named “assistant to the president for b— jobs”;
— Her description of the presidential member (“think of a thumb”).
On Jan. 17, 1998, The Drudge Report broke the intern story. The following week, Clinton gave an impassioned, finger-wagging, squint-eyed address to the nation, saying:
“I want to say one thing to the American people. I want you to listen to me. I’m going to say this again. I did not have sexual relations with that woman — Miss Lewinsky.”
Clinton spent the next seven months dragging the country through his lies, followed by the unraveling of his lies, then more lies, followed by more unraveling.
By late summer, it turned out Monica had, in fact, kept the long-rumored “blue dress” with Clinton’s semen on it. The president was ordered to produce a sample of his DNA. It was one of many presidential “firsts” under Clinton. A few weeks after producing his DNA, Clinton addressed the nation: “Indeed, I did have a relationship with Miss Lewinsky that was not appropriate.”
Contrary to the bilge put out by the legacy media ever since their baby boomer, draft-dodging, pot-smoking, Fleetwood Mac-listening president was caught committing numerous, serious felonies, Clinton was not impeached for having a sexual affair (as hilarious as that was). He was impeached for his repeated perjuries and subornation of perjury in a citizen’s private civil rights suit against him.
In May 1994, Paula Jones had brought a lawsuit against Clinton under the 1964 Civil Rights Act — once considered more sacred than any other legislation passed in the 20th century. That law prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex, including sexual harassment. Jones alleged that, when Clinton was the governor of Arkansas — a phrase that still has a rather disreputable ring to it — he had summoned her, a lowly state employee, to his hotel room, dropped his pants and said, “Kiss it.”
To prove her case, Jones had a right to collect evidence to show that he had made similar sexual advances toward other female underlings. This had been expressly confirmed by the Supreme Court’s May 27, 1997, unanimous ruling that her lawsuit could proceed without delay. (The court’s 9-0 ruling surprised every TV lawyer, but one.)
So Clinton lied. He lied to the country, to his Cabinet and, most important, to the court — under oath in a deposition presided over by federal judge Susan Webber Wright. (I’d add “to his wife,” but no one thinks she was fooled.)
During his deposition on Jan. 17, 1998, for example, Clinton gave these answers to Jones’ lawyers:
Q: At any time were you and Monica Lewinsky alone together in the Oval Office?
A: I don’t recall.
Q: At any time have you and Monica Lewinsky ever been alone together in any room in the White House?
A: I have no specific recollection.
The president had had Monica perform oral sex on him in the White House a half-dozen times, including while he was taking calls from members of Congress. On Easter Sunday, he’d sodomized her with a cigar. He’d just spent months orchestrating a massive campaign to ensure Monica would submit a perjurious affidavit to Jones’ attorneys, such as asking Vernon Jordan to arrange a job for her at Revlon in New York City.
To say that he “had no specific recollection” of being alone with Monica is blinding, inarguable perjury.
Liberals sneer that Clinton merely “lied about sex.” If it’s OK to “lie about sex,” then we can’t have laws about sex. No laws against sexual harassment, rape, child molestation, human trafficking, prostitution. (Oh sorry — I think I just listed the entire Democratic platform.) Those are all “just about sex”!
That’s why Clinton heatedly insisted that his testimony was “legally accurate,” saying, “It depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is.”Perjury is a very serious crime. The Supreme Court sure thought so! (This is in contrast to the entire Democratic Party: Not a single Democrat voted against Clinton in the Senate impeachment trial, despite his screamingly obvious perjuries.)
Clinton’s first State of the Union address following his Senate trial happened to be the last one of his presidency. The entire Supreme Court boycotted the event. Even the two justices he’d appointed! The court’s gigantic message to the felon was conveyed to the sergeant-at-arms in a terse, two-sentence note expressing regrets.
We can’t have a legal system if people feel free to lie under oath.
Idiots keep announcing on TV that all impeachments are “political,” which they understand to mean “partisan.” No — that’s not what it means. As Alexander Hamilton explained in Federalist 65, impeachable offenses are “political” in the sense that they are attacks on the body politic — “injuries done immediately to the society itself.”
It doesn’t get much more injurious to a “nation of laws, not men” than to have the president of the United States perjuring himself over and over and over again in a citizen’s Supreme Court-approved lawsuit against him.
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, the great El Rushbo, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.
South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi withholding impeachment articles from Senate. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., insisted Sunday that if House Speaker Nancy Pelosi does not deliver articles of impeachment against President Trump to the Senate by the end of the week, the Senate should “take matters in our own hands.”
Graham accused Pelosi of playing political games and trying to exert control over the Senate trial by keeping it from starting. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., recognized Friday on the Senate floor the chamber’s rules prevented him from doing anything until Pelosi does her part, but Graham proposed a solution that could remove what McConnell has called an “impasse” in the process.
“What I would do, if she continues to refuse to send the articles as required by the Constitution, I would work with Senator McConnell to change the rules of the Senate so we could start the trial without her, if necessary,” Graham proposed on “Sunday Morning Futures.”
When asked how long he would wait before taking this step, Graham replied, “Days, not weeks.”
Graham justified this by claiming that Pelosi was engaging in a “political stunt” by holding off on sending the impeachment articles to the Senate, weeks after they were approved by a House vote. He said McConnell would not let her dictate how events unfold.
“Well, we’re not going to let Nancy Pelosi use the rules of the Senate to her advantage. This is dangerous to the presidency as an institution,” Graham said. “They impeached the president, but the speaker of the House is holding the articles back, trying to extort from the majority leader of the Senate a trial to her liking. They’re trying to hold these articles over the head of the president.”
Graham laid out how he would expect the trial to go, allowing both sides to present arguments before determining whether witnesses were needed.
“We’ll use the Clinton model, where you take the record established in the House, let the House managers appointed by Pelosi make the argument, let the president make his argument why the two articles are flawed, and then we’ll decide whether we want witnesses. But this should be done in a couple of weeks,” he said.
Graham expressed hope that the Senate could conclude the impeachment trial before the end of January, but reiterated that this may require the Senate to push Pelosi out of the equation.
“If we don’t get the articles this week, then we need to take matters in our own hands and change the rules, deem them to be delivered to the Senate so we can start the trial, invite the House over to participate if they would like,” he said. “If they don’t come, dismiss the case and get on with governing the country.”
Fox Business Network’s Maria Bartiromo contributed to this report.
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been seen all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News” and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, and even the great El Rushbo.
From left, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., House Committee on Oversight and Reform Chairwoman Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., House Financial Services Committee Chairwoman Maxine Waters, D-Calif., House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of Calif., listens to an aide as they meet in a …/AP Photo/Andrew Harnik
A partial transcript is as follows;
ANCHOR: Democrats and Nancy Pelosi have said they are waiting on these articles to ensure there’s a fair trial in the Senate, but there have been a lot of other theories floated by Republicans, by folks from the other side of the aisle that think that Nancy Pelosi is stalling for all sorts of reasons. So I want to get your thoughts on why these articles are being held.
REP. MICHAEL BURGESS: My first take is that they’re holding the articles of impeachment because they really had nothing in the first place, so if they send them to the Senate and it crashes and burns, the president is exonerated and they did not accomplish what they set out to accomplish, which was to politically harm the president at the beginning of a political year.
ANCHOR: So you think they’re stalling, in essence, to continue digging, that they’re hoping they find something more?
REP. BURGESS: Look, they had all the tools at their disposal on the House side, they made it secret. They had armed guards outside the doors. They still haven’t made all of the transcripts available to members of Congress. And according to House rules, any committee hearing, the transcript is supposed to be available to other House members. But they have not done so, and no one has asserted that these are classified briefings. They were just simply secret hearings because it behooved the speaker to have secret hearings. That doesn’t pass muster. That’s not a constitutional part of the process.
Will impeaching the President backfire on Democrats in the next election?
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, the great El Rushbo, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.
The House Judiciary Committee reportedly told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on Monday that it still wanted former White House counsel Don McGahn to testify even though Trump has already been impeached, because his impeachment could reveal that Trump obstructed justice in the Russia investigation.
Democrats voted last Wednesday to impeach the president for “abuse of power” and “obstruction of Congress,” in claims related to his dealings with Ukraine. But the text of the articles of impeachment cited Trump’s alleged “previous invitations of foreign interference,”referring to debunked allegations that he sought to collude with Russia in the 2016 presidential campaign.
Democrats pursued McGahn’s testimony at the time the Mueller Report was released because they were determined to find any evidence that Trump obstructed justice, even though he had made every witness and document available to investigators and declined to exercise executive privilege. Mueller did not refer Trump for prosecution, nor did he “exonerate” the president, but both Attorney General William Barr and then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein said that there was insufficient evidence to bring charges.
Nevertheless, Democrats continued to look for evidence of obstruction, even trying to obtain the grand jury materials that Mueller had used, which Barr was prohibited, by law, from providing to Congress (which found him in contempt anyway).
The White House, which had previously cooperated with Mueller, balked at allowing the president’s counsel to testify before Congress after the Mueller inquiry ended, citing legal privileges and constitutional boundaries.
But Democrats persisted.
In the Judiciary Committee’s report accompanying the articles of impeachment, which it cited in its court filing Monday, Democrats hinted that they included Trump’s so-called “obstruction of justice” in the Russia investigation in their “obstruction of Congress” article of impeachment, though they did not specifically charge him with obstructing justice (footnotes removed):
The Second Article of Impeachment impeaches President Trump for obstructing Congress with respect to the House impeachment inquiry relating to Ukraine. Yet, as noted in that Article, President Trump’s obstruction of that investigation is “consistent with [his] previous efforts to undermine United States Government investigations into foreign interference in United States elections.” An understanding of those previous efforts, and the pattern of misconduct they represent, sheds light on the particular conduct set forth in that Article as sufficient grounds for the impeachment of President Trump.
These previous efforts include, but are not limited to, President Trump’s endeavor to impede the Special Counsel’s investigation into Russian interference with the 2016 United States Presidential election, as well as President Trump’s sustained efforts to obstruct the Special Counsel after learning that he was under investigation for obstruction of justice.
However, a footnote at the end of the first paragraph above suggested that the committee would seek to interview McGahn to obtain evidence for use in a Senate trial on existingarticles of impeachment, not new ones:
This Committee has undertaken an investigation relating to the Special Counsel’s report. That includes inquiring into President Trump’s obstruction of the Special Counsel, as well as a review of other aspects of the Special Counsel’s underlying work that the President obstructed. As part of this investigation, the Committee has sought to compel testimony by former White House Counsel Donald F. McGahn II, and to review certain grand jury materials relating to the Special Counsel’s report. Should the Committee obtain the information, it would be utilized, among other purposes, in a Senate trial on these articles of impeachment, if any. The Committee, moreover, has continued and will continue those investigations consistent with its own prior statements respecting their importance and purposes.
The DC Circuit is scheduled to hear the case on January 3. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has refused to turn over the articles of impeachment to the Senate because she says she is awaiting a guarantee of a “fair trial”— though the Constitution suggests that the Senate could hold a trial anyway.
She may, however, also be awaiting the D.C. Circuit’s ruling on the McGahn case, which would almost certainly be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court by either side.
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He earned an A.B. in Social Studies and Environmental Science and Public Policy from Harvard College, and a J.D. from Harvard Law School. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.
WASHINGTON, DC – DECEMBER 18: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) delivers remarks alongside Chairman Jerry Nadler, House Committee on the Judiciary (D-NY) and Chairman Eliot Engel, House Foreign Affairs Committee (D-NY), following the House of Representatives vote to impeach President Donald Trump on December 18, 2019 in Washington, … Sarah Silbiger/Getty Images
In a brief submitted to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, the panel’s counsel Doug Letter argued its subpoena of McGahn, who departed the White House last year, is not moot despite the House’s approval of two impeachment articles — abuse of power and obstruction of Congress — in a partisan vote on Wednesday evening.
“If McGahn’s testimony produces new evidence supporting the conclusion that President Trump committed impeachable offenses that are not covered by the Articles approved by the House, the Committee will proceed accordingly—including, if necessary, by considering whether to recommend new articles of impeachment,” the brief reads.
The House Judiciary Committee, chaired by Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY), subpoenaed McGahn in March for its investigation into whether President Trump or senior White House officials obstructed justice during special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into now-debunked collusion between the 2016 Trump campaign and Russia.
The Trump White House requested McGahn refuse to comply with the subpoena, citing “absolute immunity” that has long shielded top advisers from testifying before Congress.
Late last month, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued an administrative stay of previous ruling directing McGahn to testify. The court said it would consider granting a longer stay and scheduled a hearing for oral arguments on January 3.
In a ten-page filing, the Department of Justice argued the House’s impeachment vote “eliminate[d] the need” for McGahn to answer congressional questioning and “underscore the reasons why this Court should dismiss or deny the Committee’s suit without adjudicating the subpoena’s validity.”
“Indeed, if this Court now were to resolve the merits question in this case, it would appear to be weighing in on a contested issue in any impeachment trial,” DOJ lawyer wrote. “That would be of questionable propriety whether or not such a judicial resolution preceded or post-dated any impeachment trial.”
Tortoise and the Hairbrained – Democrats in the House were urgently in a hurry to impeach President Trump only to withhold passing it on to the Senate.
Will impeaching the President backfire on Democrats in the next election?
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.
President Donald Trump / Source: AP Photo/Patrick Semansky
In the history of politics, there is no precedent for the media’s entire focus to be on undoing the last presidential election. True, the left has wanted to impeach every Republican president, but at least they used to wait a decent interval between the inauguration and concocting some preposterous “impeachable offense.”
With Trump, it’s never been about anything he’s done. It’s him they can’t stand. The technical grounds for their impeachment is: REMOVE THIS MONSTER FROM MY SIGHT!
The left has gone from “literally shaking” on election night 2016, to “literally shaking” at Trump firing the FBI director (a.k.a. “his employee”), to “literally shaking” at Trump engaging in foreign policy.
On cable news, they’re still talking about Trump’s “Russia, if you’re listening” joke.
U.S. media: Proud not to get a joke.
The media pretend the president engaging in standard foreign policy is a big constitutional crisis. It is, but not the way they mean.
As explained in the seminal book on impeachment, “High Crimes and Misdemeanors: The Case Against Bill Clinton,” impeachment is not for policy disputes. That’s why, in any five-minute span on cable TV, you will hear someone say that James Madison expressly rejected “maladministration” as a ground for impeachment at the Constitutional Convention. Otherwise, he said, “so vague a term” would mean the president could serve only at “the pleasure of the Senate.”
This isn’t a random quote, selectively plucked from the convention notes. It’s the entire point of our country.
In Great Britain, impeachments were used as a weapon against a king whose veto Parliament could not override. Impeachment was often the only way members of Parliament could express themselves on policy matters. They couldn’t block the king’s policies, but they could impeach his ministers for giving him “bad advice.”
As history buffs will recall, we fought a revolution to get rid of the king. No king — and Congress has plenty of tools for stymieing a president’s agenda and pushing their own, such as that thing that’s completely slipped their minds: enacting legislation.
Moreover, the president, unlike a king, would not govern by divine right, but by the consent of the people. Staging impeachments over policy disagreements is a logical absurdity under our Constitution.
Worse, the Democrats are impeaching Trump over his foreign policy, nearly the exclusive province of the commander in chief.
To be extra clear that they don’t care about the Constitution — much less the Founding Fathers, whom they keep solemnly invoking — the Democrats’ second article of impeachment against Trump is for “obstruction of Congress.” That is pretty much his job. How about impeaching a president for ordering a surprise military attack or appointing members of his Cabinet?
The Constitution gives each of the three branches devices to oppose the others. Congress can issue subpoenas, and the president can claim executive privilege. Then a court — probably the Supreme Court — will decide who wins.
Democrats have spent three years doing nothing but trying to obstruct the president. They’re indignant, scribbling up articles of impeachment, because he refuses to help them obstruct him.
The Supreme Court just took a case that will decide whether Trump can “obstruct” a House Committee from subpoenaing his financial records. So now it’s not just the executive branch, but the judicial branch, that’s obstructing the almighty, shall-not-be-defied legislative branch. I guess the House will have to impeach the Supreme Court, too.
At least they’re not wasting time passing any laws. That will save us the embarrassment of the House impeaching the president for vetoing a bill.
In an attempt to prove the wide acceptance of their insane ideas about impeachment, the media keep telling us that, as Mike Murphy put it, “if it was a secret vote, 30 Republican senators would vote to impeach Trump.” (In his defense, Murphy also thought Jeb! was going to be president.)
Murphy’s non-disprovable smear has been repeated all over — by E.J. Dionne at a Brookings Institute forum, on cable news shows, and in several articles in The New York Times just in the last week.
This drop-the-mic charge is one of most cynical and anti-democratic arguments you will ever hear. It’s rolled out as if it’s argument for impeachment, when in fact it’s an argument against.
The “secret vote” claim is the precise reason these people should never be anywhere near power — not even with a White House tour group. They think a presidential phone call should be broadcast on Netflix, but a senator should only vote in private, like having sexual relations.
I’m to vote in full view of the public? Oh, how awful!
Yes, I’m quite certain that most politicians would love to do things differently — if only they could be rid of the pesky rabble looking over their shoulders. I just didn’t think they’d be stupid enough to admit it.
After years of disdain for the U.S. constitution, the Democrats are now pledging their undying love for it and the founders to Justify impeaching Trump.
Will impeaching the President backfire on Democrats in the next election?
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.
US President Donald Trump speaks at the White House Summit on Child Care and Paid Leave on December 12, 2019, in Washington, DC. (Photo by Brendan Smialowski / AFP) (Photo by BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images)
Support for impeaching President Trump is dropping while opposition is growing, a CNN poll released this week reveals.
A full House vote on the two approved articles of impeachment against the president, abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, is expected to take place this week. However, as recent polls have indicated, support for impeachment is dropping and opposition is growing.
A CNN poll released this week, conducted by SSRS December 12-15, among 1,005 adults, found that 45 percent support impeaching the president. That reflects a 5-point drop from November’s results, which showed support for impeachment at 50 percent.
Support for impeaching the president, even among Democrats alone, is dropping. In November, 90 percent of Democrats supported impeaching the president. The most recent results show the number falling to 77 percent — a 13-point drop in one month.
Meanwhile, opposition is growing. According to the poll, 47 percent oppose impeaching the president, reflecting a four-point jump from last month’s results, when opposition stood at 43 percent. The poll’s margin of error is +/- 3.7 percentage points.
The results coincide with the House Judiciary Committee’s decision to advance articles of impeachment against the president. The full House is expected to vote this week. According a report from the Wall Street Journal, Democrats have enough votes to impeach, making a trial in the Senate inevitable.
By Monday afternoon, at least 18 from the 31 Democratic-held districts that Mr. Trump won in the 2016 presidential race had announced they would support the abuse-of-power and obstruction of Congress charges, according to a Wall Street Journal survey, with two saying they are opposed.
…
With the new announcements of support, and assuming no unexpected defections, Democrats have enough votes to impeach the president. While Americans nationally are about evenly split on whether they back impeachment, according to an average of polls by RealClearPolitics, some of the Democrats in the Trump-won districts acknowledged potential political risks.
About one-third, 32 percent, believe the partisan impeachment effort will ultimately help Trump’s reelection bid. The number is even greater among Republicans, with 54 percent indicating that impeachment will help him in the 2020 election.
An IBD/TIPP poll released Monday suggested that impeachment is already having an impact on the 2020 race, with voters shifting to the president over his potential Democrat contenders in hypothetical general election matchups.
“Yet another poll bad for House Democrats impeachment. CNN poll out today: Impeachment under water at 45-47,” Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) wrote, noting the significance of impeachment support dropping and opposition growing.
“Support for the charade falling just about everywhere,” he added:
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, the great El Rushbo, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.
Democrats are doing everything imaginable to try and impeach President Trump, but would it really be constitutional to do so? Law professor Alan Dershowitz says absolutely not!
Dershowitz recently sat down with Mark Levin and discussed the impeachment inquiry. Levin asked Dershowitz right out of the gate, “Should President Trump be impeached?”
“It would be unconstitutional for President Trump to be impeached on the current record. It would be an utter abuse of the power of Congress. The constitution sets out 4 criteria for impeaching a President, treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
Unless one of those criteria is met, Congress does not have the authority to impeach and if they do their impeachment would be void. Alexander Hamilton said, “Any act of Congress that is inconsistent with the Constitution is void. Now Congress maybe can get away with impeaching because there won’t be judicial review, but that doesn’t mean they wouldn’t be violating their oath of office. They would be abusing their power if they impeach President Trump on this record.”
Levin then asked Dershowitz about briber and what it means to which he responded,
“It can’t operate when you’re the president of the United States and you’re conditioning or withholding money in order to make sure that a country isn’t corrupt and you’re asking them to investigate.”
That just doesn’t fit any definition of bribery — common law definition of bribery, statutory definition of bribery — however you define the constitutional word ‘bribery.’ It just doesn’t fit.”
They have Trump in their sights. They want to figure out a way of impeaching him and they’re searching for a crime.
“First, they came up with abuse of power — not a crime — it’s not in the Constitution. So now they’re saying ‘bribery,’ but they’re making it up. There is no case for bribery based on, even if all the allegations against the president were to be proved, which they haven’t been, but even if they were to be proved it would not constitute the impeachable offense of bribery. “
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, the great El Rushbo, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.
Listening to this socialist trial of President trump, under the transparent guise of being an impeachment inquiry, I am left with many questions.
The Leftist are proceeding with a hearing to impeach a dully elected President based on presumptuous, manufactured, taken out of context, spun and manipulated farce they represent as facts. This is more proof of their socialistic mindsets because socialist conduct all trials this way. The verdict is predetermined. The accused is doomed to a guilty verdict. Here’s the question: If given the control of all three of the divisions of The Federal Government, what will stop them from treating all people of the United States the same?
Rival politicians?
Judges?
Governors?
Any person whose speech they don’t like?
, etc., etc.?
What would stop the socialist left from telling the American people that their interpretation of the Constitution is the ONLY correct one?
Would these socialist outlaw the Electoral College making all national elections based on who got the most votes removing all possibility that a Conservative/Republican would ever be elected?
How long would it take to take over control of the states?
How long before our Constitution would be done away with and replaced with a socialist supported document?
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.
It is obvious that Pelosi and the Democrats hate President Trump but they hate his voters even more and are willing to abuse their power to get rid of him.
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, the great El Rushbo, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.
A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, the great El Rushbo, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff hired a former National Security Council aide who worked with alleged Ukraine whistleblower Eric Ciaramella at the NSC during the Obama and Trump administrations the day after the phone call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
It was previously reported by the Washington Examiner that public records indicated Sean Misko, 37, started work on Schiff’s committee in August as a professional staff member. A specific start date was not available until this week, when the latest congressional quarterly disbursements were released.
The new records show that Misko’s official hire date was July 26.
Misko was the director for the Gulf States at the NSC between 2015 until the first half of 2018. The Washington Examiner has established that the whistleblower is a CIA officer who was on the NSC during the Obama administration and worked on Ukrainian issues with Joe Biden, the 2020 Democratic candidate, when he was vice president.
Ciaramella, 33, is a career CIA analyst and was the Ukraine director on the NSC from 2016 until the summer of 2017. In October 2016, he was Biden’s guest at a State Department banquet.
WASHINGTON, DC – NOVEMBER 4: U.S. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) speaks to reporters following a closed-door hearing with the House Intelligence, Foreign Affairs and Oversight committees at the U.S. Capitol on November 4, 2019 in Washington, DC. On Monday, House investigators released the first transcripts from … Drew Angerer/Getty Images
House Intelligence Committee chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) is giving members of his committee just 24 hours to read and sign off on his report recommending articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump. As Breitbart News reported Friday, House Judiciary Committee chairman Rep. Jerry Nadler has previewed the report, and suggested it will include claims of “collusion” with Russia — as well as Ukraine, Russia’s enemy.
And as reported Saturday, Schiff will provide the full report to committee members on Monday, who must sign off on Tuesday in time for the first hearing in Nadler’s committee on Wednesday, which will discuss the supposed constitutional and legal basis for impeachment.
It is a foregone conclusion that Democrats will sign off on Schiff’s report. Evidence does not seem to be the top priority for Democrats: a majority favored an impeachment inquiry by August 1, eleven days before the so-called “whistleblower” sent a letter to Schiff complaining about Trump’s phone call with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky.
However, as the Washington Examiner‘s Byron York has noted, Democrats are in such a rush that they are leaving potential facts out of their examination. For example, they could wage a court battle to force former National Security Adviser John Bolton to testify. Bolton reportedly disapproved of the role played by U.S. Ambassador to the E.U. Gordon Sondland and Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani in relations with Ukraine. He could be a key witness. However, Democrats did not want to wait to hear what he had to say.
As York noted recently in a column titled“Why the rush toward impeachment?”, Democrats “are racing to get the job done by Christmas. They’re not even trying to hear from some key witnesses, like former national security adviser John Bolton, because they don’t want to take the time to go to court over it.”
York notes that Democrats are fearful of letting impeachment drag into the 2020 presidential primary, when it will pull several U.S. Senators off the campaign trail. And they are also worried about the fact that public support for impeachment is stagnant at best, and slipping at worst, after lackluster public hearings last month.
But the rush has been a feature from the very beginning. On the day that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced an impeachment inquiry, the president had already announced that he had declassified the transcript (or “readout”) of the phone call with Zelensky, and that it would be published the next day. Pelosi did not want to wait for the evidence: her decision was driven by political factors.
Likewise, the Intelligence Committee has rushed its proceedings before all of the evidence was available to most members of Congress, or the public. It often published lengthy transcripts of closed-door depositions on the eve of public hearings, and only released the most exculpatory transcript after public hearings were over.
Nadler has given Trump until Friday to respond to a request to participate, either directly or through his counsel, in the Judiciary Committee’s impeachment proceedings.
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He earned an A.B. in Social Studies and Environmental Science and Public Policy from Harvard College, and a J.D. from Harvard Law School. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.
Legal Insurrection
Legal Insurrection went live on October 12, 2008, originally at Google Blogger. We hit our one-millionth visit about 11.5 months later, our second million a few months after that, and since then readership and linkage from major websites have grown drama
Family
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
Legal Insurrection
Legal Insurrection went live on October 12, 2008, originally at Google Blogger. We hit our one-millionth visit about 11.5 months later, our second million a few months after that, and since then readership and linkage from major websites have grown drama
Military
Legal Insurrection
Legal Insurrection went live on October 12, 2008, originally at Google Blogger. We hit our one-millionth visit about 11.5 months later, our second million a few months after that, and since then readership and linkage from major websites have grown drama
Legal Insurrection
Legal Insurrection went live on October 12, 2008, originally at Google Blogger. We hit our one-millionth visit about 11.5 months later, our second million a few months after that, and since then readership and linkage from major websites have grown drama
NEWSMAX
News, Opinion, Interviews, Research and discussion
Opinion
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
Legal Insurrection
Legal Insurrection went live on October 12, 2008, originally at Google Blogger. We hit our one-millionth visit about 11.5 months later, our second million a few months after that, and since then readership and linkage from major websites have grown drama
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
You Version
Bible Translations, Devotional Tools and Plans, BLOG, free mobile application; notes and more
Political
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
Legal Insurrection
Legal Insurrection went live on October 12, 2008, originally at Google Blogger. We hit our one-millionth visit about 11.5 months later, our second million a few months after that, and since then readership and linkage from major websites have grown drama
NEWSMAX
News, Opinion, Interviews, Research and discussion
Spiritual
American Family Association
American Family Association (AFA), a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, was founded in 1977 by Donald E. Wildmon, who was the pastor of First United Methodist Church in Southaven, Mississippi, at the time. Since 1977, AFA has been on the frontlines of Ame
Bible Gateway
The Bible Gateway is a tool for reading and researching scripture online — all in the language or translation of your choice! It provides advanced searching capabilities, which allow readers to find and compare particular passages in scripture based on
Political Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.
House managers are wasting everybody’s time impeaching a president they know is going to be exonerated. Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.
Political Cartoon A.F. Branco ©2020.
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.
Political Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
Political cartoon A.F. Branco ©2019.
Political Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
What Did You Say? 
You must be logged in to post a comment.