Monday, January 27, 2020

New York Times Having A Clearance Sale On 11th Hour Bombshells

Sunday night the failing New York Times published a “breaking news” report based on an unpublished manuscript of John Bolton’s new book wherein he alleges President Trump said he wanted to keep foreign aid to Ukraine “frozen until its officials helped him with investigations into Democrats.”

Riddle me this:  Is this an amazing coincidence or a strategically timed leak to aid the Democrats’ coup to remove this President?

Hours after the New York Times leaked a passage from the book “The Room Where It Happened” it popped up for pre-order on Amazon. The book’s arrival on Amazon came a day before the President’s lawyers resume their presentation of his defense in the Senate.

Bolton's "manuscript was transmitted to the White House for prepublication review by the National Security Council," said Bolton adviser Sarah Tinsley. "The ambassador has not passed the draft manuscript to anyone else. Period." Bolton's lawyer, Charles Cooper, said in a statement "it is clear, regrettably, from The New York Times article published Sunday that the prepublication review process has been corrupted and that information has been disclosed by persons other than those properly involved in reviewing the manuscript."

Adam Schiff and the Democrats quickly pounced claiming, “Having access to Bolton's manuscript may have given Trump's aides and lawyers direct insight into what Bolton would say if he were called to testify at the impeachment trial," and "it also intensified concerns among some of his advisers that they needed to block Mr. Bolton from testifying,” the NYT reports.

Meanwhile, Bolton associates tell told the paper he wants to testify because “he believes he has relevant information and he has also expressed concern that if his account of the Ukraine affair emerges only after the trial, he will be accused of holding back to increase his book sales.” 
Sen. Joni Ernst displaying her notes from Saturday's impeachment trial showing names of House Impeachment Managers who voted AGAINST aid to Ukraine.

Lt. Col. Yevgeny Vindman, a senior ethics lawyer for the National Security Council and identical twin brother of Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, is in charge of reviewing all publications by current and former NSC officials and likely would have seen former NSC Advisor Bolton’s draft manuscript after it was submitted for prepublication at the end of December 2019.

UPDATE II:  Welcome readers of Whatfinger News.

Flowing Curves Of Beauty

Exercise makes you look better naked, but then again so does alcohol.

Saturday, January 25, 2020

Pathetic, Vile Adam Schiff: “Your Head Will Be On A Pike”

As the closing arguments for Democrat House impeachment managers mercifully came to a close, Lead Manager Adam Schiff, invoked a report from CBS News that a Trump confidant had warned, “Vote against the President and your head will be on a pike.”

After that remark, the generally respectful mood in the Senate immediately changed. Republicans across their side of the chamber groaned, gasped and said, “That's not true.” One key moderate Republican, Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, looked directly at Schiff, shook her head and said, “Not true."
“Not only have I never heard the ‘head on the pike’ line," Collins said in a statement, "but also I know of no Republican senator who has been threatened in any way by anyone in the administration.”

She had been listening intently to Schiff's presentation and writing down some of his points. When he made the “pike” comment, she looked directly at Schiff and slowly and repeatedly shook her head back and forth. When he finished his speech and the trial adjourned, Sens. John Cornyn (R-TX) and John Barrasso (R-WY) made a beeline for her seat. Collins again shook her head and said, “No.”

Sen. James Lankford (R-OK), told reporters the CBS report is "completely, totally false."

“None of us have been told that,” he added. "That's insulting and demeaning to everyone to say that we somehow live in fear and that the President has threatened all of us.''

Sen. Mike Braun (R-IN), asked about the remark, added, "I could hear the gasps." 

Some Democrats also distanced themselves from the House Intelligence Committee chairman. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV), who has not said if he will vote to acquit or convict the President, added that he also believed Schiff crossed the line. 

"I don't know why people do that," Manchin added. "That could have been left out that's for sure."  

Friday, January 24, 2020

A Complete Farce Of A Trial

Will millions of Americans tune in to watch Day Three of House impeachment managers repeating themselves endlessly and replaying clips of videos that are deliberately edited to remove all context?

Of course not.  Senators have been seen dozing off, passing notes, making paper airplanes, playing with fidget spinners and stress balls.

This whole thing revolves around a temporary hold on a foreign aid package that was released by the deadline and turned into some sinister act of treason, bribery and extortion.

I think it is fair to say the House Democrats have painted themselves into one hell of a corner.  

Their case against the President is neither “overwhelming” nor “uncontested”. Democrats rigged the House impeachment proceedings.  They rode rough-shod over witness lists, leaked selectively to complicit press poodles and rushed head-long to indict President Trump declaring breathlessly that every day the President is not impeached is another day the country is in peril.

The bipartisan support they hung their hat on never materialized.  They got squat from the Mueller Report.  The FISA Court just yesterday officially admitted that half of the secret surveillance applications it sought to spy on the Trump campaign were illegitimate.  There is no majority support for impeachment.  They haven’t moved the needle.  There has been no proof of high crimes and misdemeanors.  And now their worst fears are about to be realized:  a disastrous and thoroughly embarrassing Senate acquittal.

On Saturday, to quote Eddie Murphy from the movie 48 Hrs, there’s a new sheriff in town.

The seven House impeachment managers are about to cede the floor to the President’s legal team—perhaps for three full days.

UPDATE:  The attorneys general of 21 states have come forward with a blistering rebuke of the impeachment of President Trump, asserting in a letter to the U.S. Senate that it "establishes a dangerous historical precedent" and urged the chamber to reject the impeachment articles.

"If not expressly repudiated by the Senate, the theories animating both Articles will set a precedent that is entirely contrary to the Framers' design and ruinous to the most important governmental structure protections contained in our Constitution: the separation of powers," they wrote.

Thursday, January 23, 2020

Democrats Are Impeaching The Wrong President

Day Two of the Trump Derangement Syndrome Impeachment Trial sent me into a persistent vegetative state. Watching Adam Schiff self-immolate was the only saving grace of Act II of this shameless circus.

In a video tweeted out by ABC News, Schiff is heard lauding the military aid approved by Congress to help Ukraine defend itself.  He mentions what that aid was and tugs at our heartstrings by pointing out more than 15,000 Ukrainians died fighting Russian forces and their proxies.
Mr. Schiff, Nancy Pelosi’s ringleader in this farcical trial, is impeaching the wrong president.

The Obama Administration allocated Ukraine the paltry sum of $33 million in nonlethal support in the form of meals-ready-to-eat (MREs), blankets, bomb disposal equipment, night vision goggles, radios and engineering equipment.

In June 2014, Obama’s State Department continued to rule out providing weapons to help Ukraine fight against pro-Russian insurgents.

Lech Walesa, the heroic leader of Poland’s 2005 Solidarity labor movement, was highly critical of the decision saying, “The superpower has not been up to the job, and therefore the world is at a dangerous point and maybe it really is the case that lots of bad things are happening in the world because there is no leadership.”

Just a month before, the German publication Der Spiegel spoke with intellectuals from the United States, Western and Eastern Europe about what the events in Ukraine meant for Europe and the rest of the world.

Yale Professor Timothy Snyder told Der Spiegel,  “I think Putin is playing an all-or-nothing game, geopolitically speaking. He no longer cares about tolerable relations with the EU or about a solid relationship with Ukraine. Putin has opted for something else, a much larger project, to destabilize Ukraine and the EU [emphasis mine]. It's an all-or-nothing game because there is no going back, now that he has embarked on this path.”
SPIEGEL: Because the United States remains oddly removed from the conflict, the German government and Brussels are virtually alone in their diplomatic efforts. Has the United States lost interest in Europe? 
SNYDER: For a long time, the United States and, most of all Barack Obama, believed that Russia wouldn't make any moves, that Europe was extremely stable, and that China was the difficult country it had to deal with. Now Putin has changed that. The United States probably isn't sufficiently involved at the moment, but the US government is interested in Europe again. This is a fundamental shift. Three things have changed internationally: The EU is being confronted with a fundamental threat for the first time, America once again values the transatlantic partnership, and Ukrainian identity has been strengthened. Anyone who thinks Putin is a strategic genius should take a look at what he's achieved. If he had allowed things to continue as they had, America would gradually have drifted away from Europe, (former) President Viktor Yanukovych would have continued to ruin Ukraine and the Europeans would have kept doing what they were doing.
The Obama Administration willfully ignored the increasing Ukrainian loss of life and spilled blood with its vague promises of sanctions and expressions of “concern” delivered safely from the sidelines.

One senior Obama Administration official explained, “Ukraine is not a NATO ally, complicating the question of how to support its government.”

Congress has not been queasy about authorizing lethal assistance to any number of questionable regimes, yet when it came to Ukraine, Obama suddenly worried about the formality of alliances?  Spare me.

The New York Times, noted for its access to the inner sanctums of the Obama Administration, sized up Barack Obama correctly in a published report entitled Pentagon Plan Would Help Ukraine Target Rebel Missiles. It confirmed Obama responds to strength with weakness.

That paltry $33 million in blankets and MREs was a cowardly attempt to help Ukraine without provoking Putin.

When the first public impeachment hearing was held in November of last year, Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-OH) reminded Americans of the hot mic moment in 2012 when The World’s Most Dangerous Community Organizer told Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, “This is my last election.  After my election I have more flexibility.”

Wenstrup said, "Maybe now we understand what President Obama meant when he told Russian President Medvedev that he would have more flexibility after his election. Maybe that flexibility was to deny lethal aid to the Ukraine, allowing Russia to march right in and kill Ukrainians."

So, we’re impeaching a president over a phone call?  Those 15,000 Ukrainians who died were not on President Trump’s watch.  The lethal aid was delayed a mere 55 days and did not disrupt Ukraine’s military.  It consisted of AN/TPQ-36 counter-battery radar and FGM-148 Javelin anti-tank missile systems which lets the U.S. stand with its allies without putting boots on the ground.

According to Defense News, President Trump is seeking an additional $250 million in security aid for Ukraine in his 2020 budget request to Congress.  Incidentally, that report was published on December 4, 2019 BEFORE the jackwagons in the House voted to impeach our President.

UPDATE:  Welcome readers of Whatfinger News.    

Wednesday, January 22, 2020

Congressional Malpractice By Pelosi’s Ring Leader

As the sun set over Washington the impeachment trial mind-numbingly droned on.  Just before the 8 o’clock hour Politico published a report revealing the ringleader of the sham impeachment of President Trump “mischaracterized” evidence House Democrats used in their investigation.

The report states Schiffless sent a letter to Waddles Nadler last week summarizing “a trove of evidence from Lev Parnas.”  In one section of the letter, Schiffless claimed Parnas “continued to try to arrange a meeting with President Zelensky” citing a specific text message exchange where Parnas told Giuliani “trying to get us mr Z.”  The rest of the exchange attached to Schiffless’ letter was redacted.

An unredacted version that fell into Politico’s hands shows the interview was with the founder of Burisma, Mykola Zlochevsky, and not Ukrainian President Zelensky.

Democrat officials did not dispute the suggestion Schiffless’ claim was patently false.

A senior GOP aide said, “The most charitable view of the situation is that [Schiff’s] staff committed the equivalent of Congressional malpractice by not looking more than an inch deep to determine the facts before foisting this erroneous information on his colleagues and the American public.”

“But given the selective redactions and contextual clues, it seems as though Chairman Schiff sought to portray an innocuous meeting with Ukrainian oligarch Mykola Zlochevsky as an insidious one with the President of Ukraine simply because both of their surnames start with the letter Z.”

One of my heroes from the House Intelligence Committee impeachment proceedings back in November of 2019, Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY), responded to the breaking news in the following tweet:

“Schiff’s sham impeachment is littered with mischaracterizations, falsehoods, & political desperation. The more Schiff speaks to the American people, the more the support for impeachment is obliterated in the court of public opinion.”
This concludes our broadcast day.  Schmuck Schumer has introduced a total of seven amendments in eleven hours so far.  Each amendment calling for subpoenaing witnesses and documents has been shot down tabled by a vote of 53-47.

Tuesday, January 21, 2020

How Did That Hole Get There?

Nancy Pelosi’s impeachment inquisitor, Adam Schiff, gave opening remarks on September 26, 2019 during a House Intelligence Committee hearing on the whistleblower complaint against President Trump as it pertained to his congratulatory phone call with Ukraine’s President Zelensky that did not square with the facts.

Schiff said in his opening statement, and in numerous TV interviews, that Trump had asked Zelensky to “make up” or “manufacture” dirt on Trump’s potential 2020 opponent, former Vice President Joe Biden. That is patently false. Trump asked Zelensky to investigate, not provide false information.

Here’s the transcript of his remarks:
“It reads like a classic organized crime shakedown. Shorn of its rambling character, and in not so many words, this is the essence of what the President communicates. ‘We’ve been very good to your country, very good. No other country has done as much as we have. But you know what? I don’t see much reciprocity here. I hear what you want. I have a favor I want from you though. And I’m going to say this only seven times, so you better listen good. I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent, understand? Lots of it. On this and on that. I’m going to put you in touch with people, not just any people, I am going to put you in touch with the Attorney General of the United States, my Attorney General Bill Barr. He’s got the whole weight of the American law enforcement behind him. And I’m going to put you in touch with Rudy. You’re going to love him. Trust me. You know what I’m asking. And so I’m only going to say this a few more times. In a few more ways. And by the way, don’t call me again. I’ll call you when you’ve done what I asked.’” 
“This is in sum and character what the President was trying to communicate with the President of Ukraine. It would be funny if it wasn’t such a graphic betrayal of the President’s Oath of Office. But as it does represent a real betrayal, there’s nothing the President says here that is in America’s interest after all.”
Andrew McCarthy, who served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, is currently a Senior Fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, Director of the FDD’s Center for Law and Counterterrorism and served as an adjunct professor at New York Law School and Fordham University School of Law recently opined, “Adam Schiff is a smart guy. He did not idly dream up a “make up dirt” parody. He framed it because he knows that’s the kind of misconduct you would need to prove to warrant impeachment and removal of a president. In fact, Schiff could never prove that, but he figured parody is good enough for 2020 campaign purposes—and that’s what this [impeachment] exercise is all about.”

That is the gigantic sinkhole the Democrats have fallen into and from which they cannot extricate themselves.  If collusion with Russia had been a fact rather than a flight of fancy, the votes to impeach President Trump would have been overwhelming and he would have had to resign.  We’d be talking about President Mike Pence’s upcoming State of the Union Address and the Democrats would be shitting skittles and rainbows rather than clambering to find someone to “take out Donald Trump.”

The New York Times Endorsement Of Warren And Klobuchar Suitable For Lining The Bottom Of A Birdcage

The Editorial Board of The New York Times admitted in the third paragraph of its endorsement for the “best choice” for President of the United States what 61,943,670 Americans already knew, “…there are those who believe that President Trump was the product of political and economic systems so rotten that they must be replaced.”

“Mr. Trump maintains near-universal approval from his Party and will nearly certainly coast to the nomination. Democrats would be smart to recognize that Mr. Trump’s vision for America’s future is shared by many millions of Americans.”

The NYT is worried about restoring unity in the country insisting Amy Klobuchar must acknowledge “the depth of the nation’s dysfunction” and Elizabeth Warren must come to grips with the hard fact “the country is more diverse than her base.”
There’s an abundance of unity in red states and BLEXIT is terrifying to Democrats.  What if in November enough black Americans voted for Donald Trump to reelect him?

The new Emerson poll puts the President at 35 percent with black voters and 38 percent with Hispanics. “If you add in Asian voters at 28 percent approval,” notes Emerson’s director of polling Spencer Kimball, “our number is very close to the new Marist poll,” which finds Trump’s approval at 33 percent among non-white voters.  A recent RasmussenReports poll has Trump support among black voters at 34 percent, and even the new CNN poll has Trump’s approval among non-white voters at 26 percent.

If President Trump comes anywhere near those numbers on Election Day, he’ll win in a landslide. Minority voters—and black voters in particular—are an absolutely vital part of the Democratic base.  If black support for a Republican candidate ever reaches 20% of the total vote, a Democrat presidential candidate would not be able to win, EVER.

They admit reports of how Klobuchar treats her staff gave them “pause”.  Apparently, her admission she can be a “tough boss” and her promise to do better in the future was convincing enough for them to endorse her.

The Times described Elizabeth Warren as a “gifted storyteller.”  When I read that I laughed so hard I nearly fell out of my chair.  It was a back-handed way of saying the fake Indian is an accomplished liar.

The left seems genuinely confused by the Times’ endorsement of two Democratic candidates.  Don’t most Democrats vote at least twice? 

The Mandalorian might even say, “This is the way.”

Monday, January 20, 2020

Flowing Curves Of Beauty

Brought home some venison.
Me: Kids, guess what kind of meat this is.
Kids: ?
Me: Here's a hint; your Mom calls me this.
Kid: Don't eat it. It’s an a**hole.


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...