Home » The Steele dossier and the whistleblower complaint were just the pretexts for the investigations

Comments

The Steele dossier and the whistleblower complaint were just the pretexts for the investigations — 44 Comments

  1. The oft repeated claim that Trump wants to be impeached because it will help his reelection chances has always struck as ridiculous for many of the reasons you stated at the end of your post.

    Mark my words here in a few weeks we’ll see a consumer confidence survey that will be lower and it will say something like ‘those surveyed cited worries about impeachment proceedings’ or something similar.

    Probably, a best case scenario is if the Democrats do as they are saying and make this fast with very few hearings and vote on it before Thanksgiving then the Senate can have a trial and many senators can rightly point out that his was such a rushed process that it can’t be taken seriously then acquit and we’re back where we were only with much more bitterness, anger and division in the country.

  2. It is becoming more and more apparent that those on the Left, Democrats, and the MSM are each and all involved in a series of clandestine coordination meetings—a la “JournoList”—thus all the chorus of congresscritters or MSM talkers using exactly the same ideas, words, and phases in tune with each other, and at the same time.

    Wouldn’t it be nice if someone were able to infiltrate and tape some of these clandestine meetings and, then, manage to get these tapes out on the Internet—at least for the few hours until the social media giants took them down?

  3. Leftists on twitter are going completely berserk because one of Trump’s latest tweets has strongly criticized Schiff and Nadler, as well as AOC +3, as though they are somehow immune from criticism because the former are Jewish and the latter women of color. Such is the madness of identity politics, which is completely contemptuous of the idea of treating individuals as such (and not purely as members of some group).

  4. My argument for a Democratic impeachment, aside from Orange-Man-Bad-Must-Go, has been that the Dem leadership see Barr, Huber, Horowitz, and Durham coming at them with all-too-real reports and presumably (better be!) indictments.

  5. Another muffled footfall? Evidently.

    Matt Beebe, twitter thread:

    The ongoing Democrat info opp/psyop is starting to unravel.
    @seanmdav & @benshapiro have touched on it with some of their tweets today, but that’s the tip of the iceberg. The collusion that has been underway by the likes of Schiff and the deep state IC is shocking. Thread: 1/

    Military planners euphemistically use the term “shaping the battlefield” as they engage in full spectrum operations to (hopefully) win without firing a shot. Misinformation campaigns, etc are all part of this. But it takes careful preparation. Let’s see how it applies here: 2/

    Let’s first look at the whistleblower process, and how an “urgent concern” is to be reported. As recently as May2018, the instructions for ICWPA Form 410 (Whistleblower Complaint) included the admonition that “First-Hand Information” was required for a report to be processed. 3/

    [Screencap here, see link — sdferr]

    Read carefully: “If you think that wrongdoing took place, but can provide nothing more than second-hand or unsubstantiated assertions, IC IG will not be able to process the complaint or information for submission as an ICWPA” Wow. Seems straightforward. 4/

    But hey, you might say that the current official form on DNI’s website has no such preamble (so it’s ok to use hearsay now?) Seems very convenient that it was JUST UPDATE in AUGUST 2019(!!)… move along, nothing to see here.. 5/

    [ https://t.co/lxhfOxyhdc?amp=1 ]

    So someone in ICIG/DNI revised the procedures to make it easier to process a complaint based on hearsay (the statute still doesn’t permit it – but we’ll come back to that). This was done in August. Of 2019. Right as the whistleblower’s report was being vetted. Convenient, eh? 6/

    INCREDIBLY, IT GETS WORSE: on 23 September, FOUR DAYS ago, and BEFORE the complaint was released, the Congressional Research Service made an extensive update to their publication on “Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protections” Link here: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/R45345.pdf 7/

    The previous version of this publication was released on 13 Dec 18. Strange to make an extensive update when their has been ZERO legislative action to update the statute since then. The prior version is here: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/R45431.pdf 8/

    Let’s compare: INCREDIBLY, BEFORE THE REPORT WAS RELEASED, CRS saw fit to provide significant additional insight into what an “urgent concern” was under the statute. Neat that they’re “Johnny On The Spot” with such a fast moving train, huh? 9/

    The prior version used the term “urgent concern” twice. The current version uses it 10 times. (term has been around since at least 1998 when the ICWPA was codified). BEFORE THE REPORT WAS RELEASED to Congress the CRS researcher thought this might need more explanation. Odd. 10/

    What else changed? They added multiple pages on the “means for addressing disagreements that may arise between the ICIG and the DNI,” that were authorized in the FY2010 IAA, but for “some reason” weren’t relevant to include in the CRS analysis before the middle of this month 11/

    And how did the “nonpartisan” CRS explain the statute to Congress & staff who wouldn’t dive deeper to see if it was misleading them on the underlying statute? Glad you asked: 12/

    CRS cites chapter and verse from 50 U.S.C. §3033 in footnotes for the majority of their analysis. Except for 3 paragraphs when they discuss ICIG’s *conditional* authority to report directly to Congress. Let’s take the first two because the sleight of hand is obvious: 13/

    [Screencap here, see link]

    CRS cites chapter and verse from 50 U.S.C. §3033 in footnotes for the majority of their analysis. Except for 3 paragraphs when they discuss ICIG’s *conditional* authority to report directly to Congress. Let’s take the first two because the sleight of hand is obvious: 13/

    [Screencap, see link]

    Look carefully. The two bullets that are not footnoted in the above screen shot relate to those conditions. Indeed, the omission of the footnote is intentional to mislead. Why do we know this? Look at 50 U.S.C. §3033(k)3(A)iii & iv with me: 14/

    [Screencap, see link]

    Stick with me. The omission of “described in clause (ii)” is ESSENTIAL to understanding the game they’re playing here. What type of person does “clause (ii)” describe? Precisely three categories of people — none of which would include @realDonaldTrump 15/

    [Screencap, see link]

    Let that sink in. Congressional authority does NOT include the right to receive this type of whistleblower report. Period.

    Is that good law? Arguable. But it IS THE LAW. CRS is intentionally misleading Congress and the public to facilitate this usurpation of authority. 16/

    That third paragraph without a footnote? It’s a highly debatable editorial comment (passing off as statutory interpretation) to give Liddle- Schiff et, al even more cover to mislead their fellow Congressmen and the American public: 17/

    [Screencap, see link]

    Odd: the timing & substance of the differences in the CRS documents facilitate a particular partisan narrative that the ICIG CAN forward a report to Congress about the President AND color it an “urgent concern” under the statute, when that statute in fact says NO SUCH THING. 18/

    Folks – this is an attempted coup. The Executive branch is by no means perfect, but if the rule of law is to mean anything moving forward, we cannot allow the Legislative branch to usurp this authority and toss Constitutional checks & balances aside because “orange man bad” 19/19

    +1 on the CRS’ “editorial note”: they claim “it is not specific on who has the authority for determining whether a complaint, aside from its credibility, constitutes a matter of “urgent concern.”

    Except the statute IS explicit: Congress HAS defined it:

    [Screencap, see link]

  6. Griffin-Its apparent that the Left and the Democrats don’t care what they bust up–or what the long term consequences for us, for our political system, or for our Republic might be–just as long as they can get rid of Trump.

    Perhaps they think that, if and once they have accomplished their aim, things will revert back to something approaching “normal.”

    But, I happen to think that the condition of our country and political system after such a removal of a duly elected President Trump is going to be far, far from the “old normal.”

    In fact, that they will have so savaged and destabilized–in essence destroyed–the norms, and the political and governing system that enabled this country to be such a success as a nation–and given us almost two hundred and fifty years of increasing unity, and relative peace and prosperity in the process–that they will have very likely set us on the path to a new Civil War.

  7. Snow On Pine,

    Yep, another interesting story that came out this week was how a lot of big donor Wall Street Democrats really, really don’t want a Warren presidency because her policies are crazy bad for not just them but the economy. It’s easy to dismiss this as Wall Street fat cats complaining but it is more than that it’s massive job killing policies like banning fracking and crazy wealth tax schemes that will discourage growth. I suspect there are a lot of wealthy more centrist Democrats who are thinking twice but they made their bed and we may all have to sleep in it because Trump.

  8. Huxley said: “My argument for a Democratic impeachment, aside from Orange-Man-Bad-Must-Go, has been that the Dem leadership see Barr, Huber, Horowitz, and Durham coming at them with all-too-real reports and presumably (better be!) indictments.”

    I agree with that. The Democrats have some idea what is coming from those investigations. I think the impeachment timing (and let’s face it — the Ukraine phone call as a pretext for impeachment is weak tea) is in part to blunt the effect of those investigations. Look for Dem claims that anything they produce is just a reaction to the so-called impeachment investigation.

  9. Glenn Reynolds calls the Ukraine-Impeachment a “spoiling attack.” Here’s how the DOD defines such as an attack:

    A tactical maneuver employed to seriously impair a hostile attack while the enemy is in the process of forming or assembling for an attack. Usually employed by armored units in defense by an attack on enemy assembly positions in front of a main line of resistance or battle position. (US DoD)

    As Glenn says:

    IT’S MORE LIKE A SPOILING ATTACK DESIGNED TO REDUCE THE IMPACT OF THOSE REVELATIONS: Dems’ impeachment frenzy is the prelude to the coming time bombs about to explode in their faces. “The three time bombs have names: Horowitz, Huber, and Durham. When the Department of Justice inspector general issues his report, then John Huber and John Durham, the U.S. attorneys tasked with investigating crimes suspected in the Clinton Foundation; Uranium One; and the FISA warrants used to spy on the Trump campaign, transition, and presidency will be free to start seeking indictments, or to unseal indictments that may have already been issued by their grand juries. The reports and the unleashing of the two U.S. attorneys are coming soon, as those mentioned in the I.G. report are currently submitting their responses for inclusion in the final report.”

    https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/343506/

  10. When there’s talk of a Civil War, what is meant? State vs State, evolving into coalitions on each side? The obvious place to begin seems California and I guess Oregon-Washington unless say Arizona-Colorado are in the same camp. The Civil Guard (minus some desertions)? What happens to the Armed Forces under the President? What happens to the police?

    Otherwise, what is meant? I’ve never thought about this in any kind of practical terms. Who has?

  11. “Otherwise, what is meant?”

    I would suggest the ancient Greek term “stasis”, a description of which can be found in Thucydides’ account of the civil war beginning in Corcyra. V D Hanson has also focused in on that phenomenon. In our time we can look to Angelo Codevilla’s analysis of the ongoing political divide. Or so I think.

  12. Isn’t all these subpoenas etc all toothless until the House actually votes for an inquiry? Pelosi just saying there’s no an inquiry seems to lack any actual authority.

  13. “The three time bombs have names: Horowitz, Huber, and Durham.

    I’m not persuaded there is a Huber investigation. As for Mr. Horowitz, he appears to do things according to spec, but so far what’s happened is that some of the more egregious offenders were put in the unemployment line (to collect their GoFundMe winnings and CNN contracts).

  14. Art Deco: We shall see. I must admit most heap-big-report-bombshells don’t come to much. Saying it’s different this time — and I do believe the situation is dire enough to be different — don’t make it so.

    Fingers crossed.

  15. Isn’t all these subpoenas etc all toothless until the House actually votes for an inquiry? Pelosi just saying there’s no an inquiry seems to lack any actual authority.

    physicsguy: I wonder that too. Maybe this is just a “colloquial impeachment inquiry” like Kim Foxx’s “colloquial recusal” in the Jussie Smollett case.

    Wednesday Pelosi said, “Today I’m announcing the House of Representatives is moving forward with an official impeachment inquiry.” Does “moving forward” mean there is now an inquiry or they are considering an inquiry — a pre-inquiry-inquiry, so to speak?

    In software I found myself regularly in pre-meeting-meetings, and once in a pre-meeting-meeting-meeting. I got to hate meetings.

  16. The Deep State / Big State gov’t employees are, to a huge extent, involved in a coup. It’s probably contractually illegal to get rid of them, there are many reports about how hard it is to fire any misbehaving official or clerk.

    This is part of the coup. But anti-Trump Reps, who were too afraid of Dem Media to fight back before, remain too afraid to find out the truth about who is doing what. The secret rules changes is disgusting.

    But what’s frightening, is how many people in the world “hate Trump”. I was talking to a very nice Euro bureaucrat who works, as do I, in an org to help poor Roma (Gypsies).
    She hates Trump, and wants to know what I think about him, and about his chances for reelection. I say he’s had great results.

    Words – Actions – Results. His words are lousy, his actions seem OK (no wars! tax cuts!), his results are great.
    I ask, what is more important. She grimaces, and agrees, in theory, that results are more important. But he’s so bad.

    Yet the reality is that ANY Rep is going to be faced with huge, secret hostility. Bush almost certainly also had a lot of pushback, at the inside-the-beltway level, but didn’t try to fight it.

    The Dems are deranged, and hate Reps. Because they’re Reps. And so many of them have been indoctrinated, in college, with the continuing background drumbeat that Reps are evil, often explicitly.

    It’s so sad so sad so sad. And scary.

  17. “It’s so sad so sad so sad. And scary”

    Indeed. 2020 may prove much worse than 1969 ever was. And what’s ironic is that the Baby Boomers are the bookends. We need to die off quick, but we may have already destroyed the country that raised us.

    I suspect 2020 will see much civil unrest and violence. If the Dems succeed, the right will not go quietly into the night. If Trump is reelected, the cities will burn with riots. I see no peaceful way through this next year. As GB has said many times, the Dems don’t seem to understand the chaos they are bringing. So blinded by hate are they.

  18. Look at the blue, red, purple map of county by county voting records. Although county by county there are far more red counties than blue, however within any county there will be minority reds, blues, and purple voters. Civil war 2.0 will be a free for all in many places. In addition, would you be willing to kill a long time neighbor that is red or blue based on their political leaning? I hope not.

    As far as the military is concerned, it will depend upon the president. Again, an unknown factor. I will not fire unless fired upon. Then I would kill without mercy or remorse.

    Wow edit is back. Cadillac thenewneo.

  19. “In addition, would you be willing to kill a long time neighbor that is red or blue based on their political leaning? I hope not.”

    I am reaching a point where I would not so much as cross the street to help someone who I know votes Democrat. I have seen enough on Facebook posted from people I know in real life that it is clear they think the same of us. The difference is, most people who know how to build, grow or fix anything don’t vote Democrat, so if Democrats manage to get the country to unravel, they’ll suddenly find that they need us a lot more than we need them. I for one will not be there to help if they ask me.

    Like Parker, I don’t start fights.

  20. And what’s ironic is that the Baby Boomers are the bookends. We need to die off quick, but we may have already destroyed the country that raised us.

    physicsguy: You first! I aim to stick around as long as I can.

    A younger conservative friend once congratulated me for being “a traitor to my generational class.”

  21. Huxley, I need a sarcasm tag. I am quite ashamed of what My Generation has wrought in general.

  22. huxley, physicsguy,

    As a Gen Xer I’m urging you boomers not to die off yet because the thought of what this country will be like when millenials (my def. those currently between 18-30) are in charge is terrifying. My generation is a mixed lot but without the older voters it’s game over I fear.

    Say goodbye to free speech to start with.

  23. Huxley, I need a sarcasm tag. I am quite ashamed of what My Generation has wrought in general.

    physicsguy: I might have added a /sarc to my comment myself.

    Though I don’t know if I’m ashamed of My Generation. We did what we wanted in no small part because the Greatest and Silent Generations allowed us, because I think they wished they had had that opportunity.

    Well, you don’t know what’s possible unless you push it.

    It was an interesting experiment with mixed results. I’m glad blacks and gays are no longer social outcast groups. I’m glad everyone feels freer not to jump into standard social roles. I’m glad for all the freer thinking which led to amazing music and the personal computer revolution. I’m not so glad about the disintegration of the family and the astonishing expansion of the hard left.

    People try to put us d-down (Talkin’ ’bout my generation)
    Just because we get around (Talkin’ ’bout my generation)
    Things they do look awful c-c-cold (Talkin’ ’bout my generation)
    I hope I die before I get old (Talkin’ ’bout my generation)

    –The Who, “My Generation”

  24. As a Gen Xer I’m urging you boomers not to die off yet because the thought of what this country will be like when millenials (my def. those currently between 18-30) are in charge is terrifying.

    Griffin: Likewise. I’ve put all my dying plans on hold! (Well, I was never keen on them anyway.)

    I get and don’t get the Millenials. I now go to school with them and hang in a cafe full of them.

    In my experience they are nice, hard-working boys and girls, buried in their cellphones and more than a bit scared and cynical. They don’t have as much fun as my Boomer cohort had.

    I don’t know what I can do for them and I don’t know what I do in their place. (Though I had enough problems of my own at that age.)

  25. It’s the sheer, raw injustice of this that will make very many people very angry. Nothing like rubbing it in their faces that elections don’t matter. After all, if the 2016 election had gone the other way, we would never have learned how bad the Deep State is. And it’s not like President Trump did anything really crazy, like having a secret e-mail server, or using a fake dossier to get FISA court warrants to spy on his opponents.

    After some reflection, I think that Trump’s luck will come through, and something will come up to make the Democrats look very foolish and very corrupt.

  26. Yankee: I’ve concluded that it’s more than luck for Trump.

    Not that he plays 3-D chess or anything, but he plays a cleaner game than he talks, he doesn’t have impeachment skeletons in his closet, and he doesn’t have a genius IQ but he is quite intelligent, he has fabulous street smarts and he is not afraid to use them.

    Plus Democrats way overestimate their smartness because they are used to winning through stupid tricks and charisma, and skating on their criminal behavior.

  27. I think trump is done, the deep state has check mated him, he will be impeached and eventually convicted. The senate republicans ain’t loyalists of him and there is no reason to risk their own re-elections to protect someone as unpopular, problematic and as difficult to put up with if quid pro quo is established and there is simply zero good explanation trump can give for why the fund is withheld. It’s a shame this is the hill trump will die on, joe Biden? Come on this man is almost 80 and half demented why take such a big risk just to take down someone who poses so little threat? Trump is very sloppy, reckless, careless speaker that it is only fitting that his foolish words will be his downfall.

  28. “Trump is very sloppy, reckless, careless speaker that it is only fitting that his foolish words will be his downfall.”

    Not to mention that borscht stain on his necktie, amirite?

  29. Trump is in such a precarious position that he is now at the total mercy of the president of Ukraine that his presidency can be sunken if the deep state or Clinton could get to Zelensky and persuade him into admitting that trump was strongarming him into reopening the biden investigation. Pompeo or rudy or barr are not going to be trump’s fall guys they will spill the beans once subpoenaed to testify .

  30. Total mercy. Totally. Which is bad, seeing how Trump is already 100% owned by V.Putin Inc., and those two guys P&Z can’t seem to work out their differences without rocketfire popping off in the Donbass. Very noisy. People can’t sleep with that.

    Fava beans, by the by? Or, y’know, pintos?

  31. “I think that Trump’s luck will come through, and something will come up to make the Democrats look very foolish and very corrupt.” – Yankee

    More foolish and corrupt than they already look?

    https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2019/09/27/did-this-nyt-reporter-inadvertently-expose-this-whole-trumpukraine-circus-as-a-nothing-burger-n2553834

    Some anonymous whistleblower who is reportedly a CIA agent came forward with this complaint. He didn’t listen in on the call but got it from second and third-hand accounts. So, when the Trump White House released the transcript, it shouldn’t shock us that all of the major allegations were debunked. There was no quid pro quo. There couldn’t have been since the Ukrainians weren’t even aware that aid was being reviewed until a month after the call.

    The point is there’s no quid. …

    The New York Times’ Kenneth Vogel made this point—and it pretty much exposes the whole Trump-Ukraine circus as a nothing burger, just like the collusion nonsense.

    He lists some tweets, but I already noticed this Friday in a NYT post that (somehow) got loose outside their paywall. Only one paragraph, buried in the middle, and ignored by the authors in the rest of their “analysis” — I wondered how and why they had let it slip at all.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/23/us/politics/trump-un-biden-ukraine.html?rref=collection%2Fbyline%2Fkenneth-p.-vogel&action=click&contentCollection=undefined&region=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=6&pgtype=collection

    Mr. Trump did not discuss the delay in the military assistance on the July 25 call with Mr. Zelensky, according to people familiar with the conversation. A Ukrainian official said Mr. Zelensky’s government did not learn of the delay until about one month after the call.

  32. Horowitz, Huber, and Durham will come up with a lot but it will only be covered properly by some of Fox. WAPO and NYT and CNN will ridicule it and explain it away. It unfortunately will not be a game changer, and it will be slow moving.

    There is a Deep State, created during decades of Cold War with an actual enemy determined to rule the world. It now has nothing to do. It does what all bureaucracies do, expands and protects itself.

    I am optimistic about the eventual outcome. I think all this is necessary to have true reform, which I think will come when Trump takes both houses against the second coming of Hillary, and takes them after running on a true drain The swamp platform.

    I believe the Clinton Machine is the organizing force. They created Mueller, and when that didn’t work created Ukraine. They have a clear goal, power, while the other Dems are mostly just trying to handle the problems that they see in society, although not in ways I would recommend.

    The Clinton Machine is planning for a rematch, and it is succeeding. Next will come a surge by one or more Democratic Governors driven by non-stop MSM glorification. This will block Warren and provide a VP for Hillary. There will be praise of Hillary from prominent Democrats and GOP Never Trumpers, also publicized endlessly. She won’t actually campaign but will take the Convention.

    IMO she will fail big, and she is the only one who can do it right. Trump will run on a platform of let him have a chance to govern, and drain the swamp, and take both houses with a clear reform mandate. All the crap we will have to live through for that to happen is necessary for reform to happen.

  33. After finishing the previous comment I saw this link on Drudge: http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/with-biden-damaged-and-warren-surging-could-hillary-clinton-still-enter-the-presidential-race

    I think there will be a pump of one or more male Democratic Governors as the next step. Hillary needs a VP with some supporters.

    She will never enter any primaries but will keep the world in suspenseful anticipation until the weeks before the Convention. At the proper time she will announce that she is willing if the Party demands it.

    Not sure which governors but I am sure some hard working Clinton strategists have it scoped out.

  34. The Clinton Machine is planning for a rematch, and it is succeeding.

    Only in the space between your ears.

  35. I think trump is done, the deep state has check mated him, he will be impeached and eventually convicted.

    I guess our population of barroom fantasists cancel each other out.

  36. Earlier physicsguy asked:

    Isn’t all these subpoenas etc all toothless until the House actually votes for an inquiry? Pelosi just saying there’s no an inquiry seems to lack any actual authority.

    I seconded his question and have been on the look-out for more definitive information. Here Byron York touches on the subject. It is as I suspected. Pelosi has set up this “inquiry” in murky procedural waters.

    On Tuesday, Pelosi made an “address to the nation” on the Ukraine matter. “Today, I’m announcing the House of Representatives is moving forward with an official impeachment inquiry,” the speaker said, adding that she has directed six House committees to go forward with investigations under the “umbrella” of the just-announced inquiry.

    Nowhere in Pelosi’s remarks was any indication that she would have the House vote to begin a formal inquiry. That was a break from past presidential impeachments. On Oct. 9, 1998, the House voted 258 to 176 to begin a “broad, open-ended impeachment inquiry,” in the words of a New York Times headline. The vote forced lawmakers to make a big decision, even though it was only to start an inquiry, and not to approve any particular articles of impeachment.

    Now, there’s been no vote. That might become a problem in coming days when the House seeks to enforce subpoenas in the impeachment investigation. If lawmakers seek to get grand jury information, or to pierce executive privilege, they will be in a stronger position if they are conducting what courts recognize as a “judicial proceeding” — in this case, an impeachment inquiry. But it’s not clear whether judges will recognize Pelosi’s because-I-say-so inquiry as having the same standing as an inquiry voted on by the entire House.

    –Byron York, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/eight-keys-to-the-coming-trump-impeachment-fight

  37. Here’s more on Pelosi’s shenanigans. This impeachment business has been a set-up every which way from the beginning.

    In December 2018, the soon-to-be Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, was busy making changes in the House rules for the incoming 116th Congress. She was actually setting the stage for her anticipated impeachment of President Trump. At the time, The Conservative Treehouse’s “Sundance” wrote, “Remember when we warned [November 8th, 2018] that a convergence of left-wing groups, activists, DNC donors and specifically the Lawfare team, would align with (and meet) incoming Democrat leadership to construct a road-map for the “resistance” priorities? Well, exactly that planned and coordinated outcome is visible as incoming Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi presents her new rules for the 116th congress.”

    House Democrats are currently using those new rules to subvert historic processes and prepare the articles of impeachment.

    https://www.redstate.com/elizabeth-vaughn/2019/09/29/nancy-pelosis-december-2018-rule-changes-block-republicans-participating-impeachment-process/

  38. Pingback:Democrats Have Been in Constant “Attempted Coup” Mode Since 12:01am 11-7-16 | The Universal Spectator

  39. The left only cares about power. If they retain power it doesn’t matter if things “return to normal”.

  40. Will even a single honest, patriotic Democrat stand up for the truth and call out this massively corrupt exercise? Does one exist in this country?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>