Democrats introduce article of impeachment against President Trump

Our progressive Democrat friends have lost their leftist minds when it comes to President Donald Trump. Of course, these same folks are going to call for the impeachment of any President who is to the right of Karl Marx.

Progressive inspired Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) is now well beyond hysteria and is zeroing in on absurdity. The Democrats would have the #1 and #2 DOJ heads recuse themselves from any oversight of the FBI, which reports directly to the both of them.

Is there no end to this total insanity of the Democrats?

From the WFB:

Rep. Brad Sherman (D., Calif.) announced he introduced an article of impeachment against President Donald Trump on Wednesday.

Sherman was joined by Rep. Al Green (D., Texas) as a co-sponsor on the measure. They have both publicly called for Trump’s impeachment in the past, as has Rep. Maxine Waters (D., Calif.). House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) has cautioned against impeachment talk, despite her own criticism of Trump.

Republicans control the House of Representatives and many Democrats are hesitant to go as far as calling anything done by Trump “impeachable,” fearing political backlash.

Sherman’s argument of impeachment is focused on claiming Trump has committed obstruction of justice regarding the investigation of Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election.

"I am pleased that Congressman Al Green has joined me in filing Articles of Impeachment against Donald J. Trump," Sherman said in a statement. "We now begin the effort to force the House Judiciary Committee to hold hearings on Obstruction of Justice and Russian interference in our election."

"As the investigations move forward, additional evidence supporting additional Articles of Impeachment may emerge," Sherman's statement said. "However, as to Obstruction of Justice, as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 1512 (b)(3), the evidence we have is sufficient to move forward now. And the national interest requires that we do so."

Read more......

What those foolish Democrats and their leftist media puppets (or is it the other way around) are not getting because of their fixation on collusion is that there is a massive Russian disinformation campaign going on. Much of the polarization in the country and never ending accusations are being driven by that Russian misinformation. The ones who have become pawns of Russia are the liberal legacy media.

The liberal Democrats need to realize their constant baseless harangue and rumor mill conspiratorial clap trap is nothing more than sore loser annoying noise. More than that it has gotten boring, boring, boring. Don't you people have anything else to do, but waste taxpayer money?

And for those of you in the liberal legacy media, James Comey gave you a lot of leads for interesting stories. Of course, many were about the Obama administration's real issues and entanglements, but we wouldn't want to do any real investigative reporting now, would we. Some of your news editors should open yours eyes to let you know your conspiratorial boat is taking on water, fast.

Has Trump become a convenient scapegoat for Barack Obama's and intelligence agencies' mishandling of Russian meddling and Hillary Clinton's embarrassing loss?

It's very interesting that Comey testified that Loretta Lynch ordered him to change the FBI Hillary email investigation from "investigation" to "matter". Not "I hope", but ordered him.

Furthermore, although Comey was "confused and concerned" with that order, he didn't take notes of it (like he did with Trump) and didn't report her interference as obstruction.

Obviously, Comey admits to feeling pressure from Lynch, but never did anything about it except to take it upon himself to go lightly with Hillary's interview (no notes, no tapes, no sworn testimony from her) and then usurp authority and play prosecutor, judge and jury several days later.

According to Comey's testimony, the only "pressure" he felt from Trump had to do with the investigation of Mike Flynn. Comey even testified that Trump encouraged the broader, Russian investigation to discover if there were any "satellite" individuals in his campaign that had improper Russian dealings.

I don't know (or care) if there were any tapes of Trump's conversations with Comey. What I do know is that it was strange for Comey to have an epiphany over the weekend he was fired that somehow he had to leak his version of events. His actions and testimony on the score belies one important point.

As this debate continues, there will be heated discussions about whether Trump’s statements and actions, and the surrounding circumstances, were an effort to obstruct justice. The answer: Given what we know, there is very little chance Special Counsel Robert Mueller will bring an obstruction charge against anyone in the Trump administration.

The obstruction of justice occurred when Loretta Lynch "ordered" Comey to change Hillary's email "investigation" to a mere "issue".  Comey said he didn't comply, which is irrelevant to an obstruction claim. However, he did comply when he treated Hillary's FBI testimony with kid gloves, i.e., no sworn testimony, no tapes, no notes. This is what should be investigated if anyone wants to claim obstruction of justice.

Comey is nothing if duplicitous and a good actor in feigning surprise. Ask yourself, how much of his testimony might have been motivated by revenge for his dismissal? Too many inconsistencies in his actions between Lynch and Trump.

One more point, how could a "respectable" former FBI director consciously "leak" anything? Especially someone who was trying to present themselves as such an honest, upstanding, by the book straight shooter. One answer is Comey never possessed any of those characteristics he was trying so hard to convince everyone he had.

Lexicographers will have to create a new term for "sore losers". Somehow branding the Democrats and progressives with that well-deserved term simply doesn't reach the absurdity threshold they have already crossed as a result of their infantile response to last November's loss.

It seems that Trump also informed the Russians that ISIS is planting bombs in laptop computers. If that information will be of help in saving the lives of innocent Russian airline passengers, then why not share it?

Russians are human beings too. We have already shared this information with Canada, the UK, and Australia, which are in intelligence-sharing arrangements with us. It seems that Israel provided us with the information. So, it is not like the crown jewels of national intelligence have been given away.

By the way, why is it that the progressives keep trying to proclaim the innocence of Julius and Ethyl Rosenberg, the spies who gave away our atomic bomb secrets to the Soviet Union? Why do they defend Daniel Ellsburg who leaked the Pentagon Papers?

The Democrats are all excited to disclose any damaging secret information to the world, but when Trump discloses information to save lives, why that becomes the crime of the century.

Progressives are going to do all they can to keep this "vortex" spinning. They are going to gin up unsubstantiated stories from the Democrats in the federal bureaucracies and then hawk it to the press. The stories so far have not only been unsubstantiated, but stupid. For example, the story that James Comey "Asked for more money to pursue an investigation against Trump before he was fired."

And never forget that if not for Trump, we would have Hillary Clinton in the White House. The offenses to your sensibilities by Trump would be increased a thousand fold if President Clinton were running the show.

So thank your lucky starts that Trump prevailed.

Once again, Trump isn't entitled to a free pass, but neither does he deserve to be convicted without a fair hearing.

I will agree that Trump has been contributing to his woes by his proclivity to counterpunch, a self admitted trait. These are all true facts but they represent a false choice.

What troubles me is the irresponsibility of the media, an irresponsibility born of an unwitting belief that all presidents should fit a particular mold, one that the media is accustomed to and approves of.

Let's take this sentence from a Wall Street Journal editorial: "It was political mismanagement even to hold the Russian meeting, especially the day after he fired FBI Director James Comey amid the investigation of the Trump campaign’s alleged Russian connection." While true, the real world just doesn't work that way unless we are willing to let the country always be run by the same old Washington bred and approved professional politicians.

Donald Trump is a very energetic product of the real world. He comes from a world where problems have to yield to an uncompromising focus on the ultimate objective, in this case to Make America Great Again. In doing so this man is quite at ease and perfectly capable of juggling many balls at the same time.

Let's look at the period after he fired Comey. Trump had packed a very intense agenda into just a few days before going on an important trip to the area. He focused intensely on addressing the problems of Eastern Europe and the Middle East in preparation of meetings with key European allies, and Arab and Israeli players. He met senior officials of Russia and Ukraine, and received the President of Turkey.

The strategic importance of these players is underlined by the presence of one of the most formidable foreign affairs geo-strategists, Henry Kissinger, a man with whom Trump has been consulting for at least a year.

Fine, you say, but then he shouldn't have fired Comey when he did. As I wrote earlier, Trump is an energetic and highly focused man who has little time and patience for problems that distract from his ultimate objective so he discards them without much thought, much less whether he will please professional politicians and a media that are all accustomed to an old and not too effective way of doing things.

So ask yourself who is or should be running the country, a new man who comes from a world where what matters are results, or should the country continue to be run by a self-serving know-it-all media and politicians for whom an accepted politically correct narrative is dominant?

I'll take the new results oriented man any day, and seemingly many caring thoughtful Americans do too.

No comments:

Powered by Blogger.