Van Der Veen Owns Impeachment Trial Fourth Day

Posted on February 13, 2021 by LifeZette

In the senate impeachment trial the Democrats have generally won the show and tell with video, as the Republicans will win the case. Although, the Republican lawyers were better on Friday. This is likely due to the advice of Senators Cruz, Lee, and Graham.

Sen. @tedcruz R-Texas, sits at a computer in a meeting room for the lawyers of former President Donald Trump on the fourth day of the Senate Impeachment trials for former President Donald Trump on Capitol Hill on Friday, Feb 12, 2021 in Washington, DC. pic.twitter.com/PqEv4Z1Dpu

— Jabin Botsford (@jabinbotsford) February 12, 2021

Friday’s Standouts

Standouts on Friday were the performances of Trump lawyer David Schoen and Michael van der Veen. Bruce Castor was better on Friday, but continues to disappoint, as when he referred to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger as Ben Roethlisberger, an NFL quarterback.

The Republicans did suffer, as has been widely noted, from a disadvantage on comms. The Democrats have had a slick and persuasive media presentation, albeit a tad redundant, while Republicans have relied on one short video clip, produced with bizarrely inappropriate music in the background, that they played over and over again without respite.

Perhaps it is because Democrats enjoy broad support amongst entertainment types that they were able to put together a superior show. As someone who produced and directed GOP media for twenty years I can tell you, Republicans really need to up their game in this department.

The Democrats proved Friday they are good reading presentations but are horrible extemporaneously, as van der Veen ripped them apart piece by piece and Schoen nailed them on hypocrisy, as did van der Veen, numerous times. Democrats Plaskett and Castro especially were more than once the victims of their own missteps, savagely pounced upon by van der Veen.

Republicans Get Aggressive

As for the chronology, the Republicans opened up the day aggressively.

They challenged Democrats on every point of law and common sense and got surprisingly personal with the Democrat House managers, showing them engaged in exactly the same type of behavior they accuse Trump of, hence the accurate charge of hypocrisy. But the fun really didn’t start until the question and answer period.

Senators sent one sided questions to the advocates on their side of the aisle, some senators sending a question to both sides to try and illustrate a point or trip up the opposition.

One thing must be said at this juncture. Despite earlier concerns, Democrat Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont played it right down the middle as judge. He has behaved honorably and professionally.

Republicans Win Q&A

The Republicans overwhelmingly won the Q&A, as Democrats lied, stumbled, and tried to spin their way out of trouble, to no avail. Bill Cassidy, Republican of Louisiana, interestingly sent a question up that helped the Democrats. He’s probably a solid vote for conviction, though he may just be protecting his moderate flank.

Van der Veen, taking a major page out of the message control handbook, responded to Democrat questions by going back to his own script and almost ignoring the questions. Well played.

So while the Democrats win on comms points, the Republicans ate their lunch during question and answer. On to Saturday and the conclusion of the trial. Our guess? 56-44 for conviction. 11 short of the vote needed to convict. That’s give or take a Republican surprise or two.

That gives the immediately former president two senate impeachment exonerations in about 13 months. There could also be later votes on censure and disqualification for office. Those are simple majority votes and Trump could be in trouble there.

This piece was written by David Kamioner on February 13, 2021. It originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission.

The post Van Der Veen Owns Impeachment Trial Fourth Day appeared first on The Political Insider.

Ingraham Slams DC Swamp Over Impeachment Trial

Posted on February 10, 2021 by LifeZette

Fox News Host Laura Ingraham is perhaps the toughest and best of the Fox lineup. Extremely telegenic, articulate, poised.

The level of vituperation she draws from the Left only attests to her ability to hit them hard and effectively. As has been said, you get flak when you’re over the target..

However, her most impressive talent is cutting through the morass and getting to the center of an issue. Her recent comments on impeachment bear that out.

Ingraham Discusses Impeachment

Ingraham:

“President Biden is the figurehead of the left-wing ‘insurrection’ against the American people… The Democrats and the media that serve them are like addicts looking for their next fix, and their drug of choice over the past five years has been Donald Trump.

If you’re conservative and you voted for Trump, they want you demoralized by the impeachment proceedings and the January 6th riot and they want you to believe things will never get better.”

She said the Senate impeachment trial is a “shiny object” to sidetrack voters.

“Why? Because if you keep your eye on what’s really happening out there, you’re going to realize Biden isn’t running anything. He’s barely awake,” said Ingraham.

She went on to add that the Biden administration is “populated by snotty, entitled, overeducated, underperforming goofballs who are slowly but surely dismantling our economy, attacking our prosperity and opening the door to an endless stream of illegal aliens and gang members.”

But gee, what does she really mean?

Ingraham Doubles Down

Ingraham explained:

“If we had a Congress that was focused on protecting American jobs, safety, healthcare, and education, they would immediately tighten the asylum laws…

At a time when we’re seeing more crime, fewer jobs, and millions of kids stuck in Zoom hell and not in school, Biden’s team is focusing on shielding illegals from deportation because he doesn’t want to put them through too much stress…

If that’s not enough to make your blood boil, ICE agents seeking to arrest fugitives outside jail and prisons will need prior approval from the agency’s director in Washington. Gang tattoos or records showing loose affiliation with gang activity would also not meet the narrower criteria.

“Biden’s open-borders zealots have what they want. Big business, they get their slave labor, and the social justice warriors, the far-left ‘Squad’ types, they have their new population that can be molded and formed into socialist party faithful…There is an insurrection taking place against America, all right. It’s been going on for years in the deepest depths of the D.C. swamp. And now its figurehead resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.”

As usual, she nails it.

This piece was written by David Kamioner on February 10, 2021. It originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission.

The post Ingraham Slams DC Swamp Over Impeachment Trial appeared first on The Political Insider.

Toomey Doubts The Senate Will Convict

Posted on February 9, 2021 by LifeZette

Senator Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, along with Ben Sasse of Nebraska, perhaps the sharpest members of the Senate, doubts the Senate will convict the immediately former president of “incitement of insurrection”, regardless of any evidence pro or con.

Toomey Speaks Out

FNC:

“Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., who has been a top critic of former President Trump and called for him to resign after last month’s riot at the Capitol, said in an interview Sunday that it is unlikely that the Senate will vote for a conviction on the one count of ‘incitement of insurrection.’

The 50-50 Senate is preparing for another trial that many Republicans say will serve no purpose other than to fuel the divide the country. They say Democrats want nothing more than to score political points with the trial and get one last parting shot in against Trump.”

“You did have 45 Republican senators vote to suggest that they didn’t think it was appropriate to conduct a trial, so you can infer how likely it is that those folks will vote to convict,” Toomey told press.

Toomey is correct. The trial is a sham, a waste of time, meaningless Democrat show and tell with a preordained win for the immediately former president.

Michigan State Professor Weighs In

As such, in related news, Michigan State Professor Brian Kalt wonders why the Trump defense team took one of his articles out of context. With a slam dunk win coming up, why the stretch?

“The article favored late impeachability, but it set out all the evidence I found on both sides–lots for them to use,” Kalt said. “But in several places, they misrepresent what I wrote quite badly.”

A “more problematic thing” he noticed, was that “they suggest that I was endorsing an argument when what I actually did was note that argument — and reject it.”

Trump's brief cites my 2001 article on late impeachment a lot: https://t.co/ozArTm1aVe

The article favored late impeachability, but it set out all the evidence I found on both sides–lots for them to use.

But in several places, they misrepresent what I wrote quite badly.

1/4

— Brian Kalt (@ProfBrianKalt) February 8, 2021

“When a President is no longer in office, the objective of an impeachment ceases,” a Trump memo said, citing page 66 of Kalt’s article.

But Kalt posted a screenshot of pages 66 and 67.

He says that this argument “has textual appeal” and “an admitted degree coherence,” citing Article II Section 4 of the Constitution, which refers to the removal of the “President, Vice President and all civil Officers[.]” He said that by mentioning “Officers,” this would seem not to apply to former officers.

Kalt Doubles Down

“Late impeachment, so the argument goes, which is also not self-evident,” the footnote continues, “would have also required specification if the Framers wished to include it as a possibility.” Kalt then cites page 37 of the article, showing some states discuss late impeachment in their constitutions.

“Citing me that way, they make it sound like I was making that argument. But I wasn’t,” Kalt continued. “On page 37, I raise that argument as something a critic might say, and then I refute it…”

“A critic of late impeachment could argue that things like two-thirds majority requirements are not self-evident, and therefore require specification; and that late impeachment is similarly counterintuitive…” Kalt added. “Therefore, allowing late impeachment is the self-evident proposition, not the counterintuitive one, and failure to explicitly bar it while specifying other limitations on the impeachment power is a telling omission.”

This piece was written by David Kamioner on February 8, 2021. It originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission.

The post Toomey Doubts The Senate Will Convict appeared first on The Political Insider.

Trump Selflessly Fights Election Corruption

Posted on November 23, 2020 by LifeZette

Even by his supporters like me, the president is not usually described as “selfless.” The guy has got an ego and it can be overweening at times. But, as was said decades ago on “The Real McCoys,” “If you can do it, it ain’t braggin’ ”

I think the president knows he’s lost this election even though a lot of his supporters do not. So, why would a guy who is somewhat self-obsessed, as any successful politician is, keep fighting in the courts even though he knows it’s probably a lost cause? Because, more than his ego, he cares about the country. Ok, I’ll wait for some of you to stop laughing.

Trump Cares About America

The president is said to have, during the impeachment trial, replied when someone asked him what he would do if he had to give up the presidency, “Guess I’ll just go back to being a billionaire with a supermodel wife.” True. He never needed the presidency and he doesn’t need this fight now.

He’s not some chuffed up middle class hustler who the establishment has over a barrel, which is what has upset them the most about him. So when it comes down to it, by the process deduction, there is likely one main reason he’s doing this, fighting out those lawsuits around the country, because he cares about America’s future.

Donald Trump understands that if he can make a successful case, legal or political, that this was a stolen election maybe America and the Republican Party will wake up. Maybe Joe Biden will be seen, as we were told Trump was, as a legal yet illegitimate president. Maybe the Republican Party will be proactive in 2022 and legally attack before election day, not only defend after election day.

Trump Is Fighting For Something Bigger

The president understands that if this result is accepted as legitimate the confidence of Americans in the very foundation of the republic will be shaken to its core. Why should we vote if any vote can be overturned by Democrat corruption and hijinks? Thus, he will fight to prove such corruption existed and that it changed the course of the election.

Will that prove successful in getting the president a second term right now? Unlikely. The timing is off, with states certifying and the Electoral College meeting soon. But, it can set us up for 2022 and beyond.

Measures like voter identification, chain of custody ballot security, and stringent oversight of ballot counting could go a long way to restoring trust in the system and ensuring that the person with the most legitimate votes wins the election and, in the case of a presidential election, wins the electoral college votes of a state. That has not been the case this time and the Democrats got away with stealing an election. Never again.

This piece was written by David Kamioner on November 21, 2020. It originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission.

The post Trump Selflessly Fights Election Corruption appeared first on The Political Insider.

Barrett Shines In Final Day of Questioning Before The Senate

Posted on October 15, 2020 by LifeZette

On Wednesday Judge Amy Coney Barrett again triumphed over Democrat attempts to get her to comment on matters that could potentially be before the high court.

Barrett Shines On Final Day Of Questioning

In her final day of Senate questioning she constantly told Democrat senators she couldn’t give an opinion on their contrived questions. But that didn’t stop the Democrats from asking them.

Barrett sounded sharp and looked perfect. The Democrats looked bored and sounded beaten and depressed. But the Right is crowing over Barrett’s performance and rightfully so.

Amy Coney Barrett is the definition of brilliance and class. Standing O! pic.twitter.com/eGgcJZP8eL

— Rush H. Limbaugh (@RealRLimbaugh) October 14, 2020

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham opened up the day:

“This is history being made, folks. This is the first time in American history that we’ve nominated a woman unashamedly pro-life and embraces her faith without apology and she’s going to the court.

It will be a great signal to all young women who want to share your view of the world that there’s a seat at the table for them.”

Democrats Question Barrett

Then the questions began. There were a Democrat litany of them.

Democrat Senator Leahy of Vermont asked, “And does the president have an absolute right to pardon himself for a crime? I mean, we certainly heard this question after President Nixon’s impeachment.”

“Sen. Leahy so far as I know that question has never been litigated, that question has never risen,” Barrett replied. “That question may or may not arise, but it’s one that calls for a legal analysis of what the scope of the pardon power is.”

“So because it would be opining on an open question when I haven’t gone through the judicial process to decide it, it’s not one on which I can offer a view,” she added.

Barrett said no can do at least a dozen times during the day. But the Democrats had nothing else better to do. So they kept on asking.

Ted Cruz said Democrats “are out of arguments to challenge Judge Barrett’s nomination, so aren’t bothering to show up…It is striking that as we sit here right now in this committee room, there are only two Democratic senators in the room. If you look at the dais, there’s chair after chair after chair that is empty. The Democratic senators are no longer even attending.”

Yup, they’ve given up.

Democrats Flounder

Democrat Senator Klobuchar said, “Are absentee ballots, better known as mail-in ballots, an essential way for voters to vote right now?”

“That’s a matter of policy that I can’t express a view,” Judge Barrett replied, again.

Democrat Senator Coons of Delaware asked Barrett to explain legal consequences of thinking like Justice Scalia. Barrett was not amused with Coons.

“I hope that you aren’t suggesting that I don’t have my own mind or that I couldn’t think independently or that I would just decide, let me see what Justice Scalia has said about this in the past, because I assure you I have my own mind,” Barrett said.

“But everything that he said is not necessarily what I would agree with or what I would do if I were Justice Barrett,” she added.

Democrat Senator Blumenthal of Connecticut asked, “Do you agree with the president on his views of climate change?”

“I don’t know that I have seen the president’s expression of his views on climate change,” Judge Barrett said.

Senator Booker of New Jersey said, “But do you think it’s wrong to separate children from their parents to deter immigrants from coming to the United States?”

Barrett responded, “Sen. Booker, that’s been a matter of policy debate and you know, obviously, that’s a matter of hot political debate, in which I can’t express a view or be drawn into as a judge.”

And again and again in that same manner. They ask an inappropriate question. She says she can’t comment. Kamala Harris tried to rope her into an idiotic question and answer session. Barrett deftly demurred. And so on it went.

At the end of the day, as opposed to the Kavanaugh hearings, there was little rancor, as the Democrats had clearly folded their tent. It’s all over but the final vote. Probably 52-48 for confirmation.

This piece was written by David Kamioner on October 15, 2020. It originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission.

The post Barrett Shines In Final Day of Questioning Before The Senate appeared first on The Political Insider.

Black Lives Matter Coming After American Families

Posted on September 23, 2020 by LifeZette

Black Lives Matter, the trendy Marxist terrorist group that spews racism and murders children, made it a point recently to tell America they plan to “disrupt” the American nuclear family.

But, not to let that particular cat out of the bag just yet, on Monday they erased that plan from their website. But the Washington Examiner noted it and rained on their parade by publicizing the threat to American families.

Black Lives Matter Is Coming For American Families

The site read before they scrubbed it, “We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement…” There you have it. They don’t try and sugarcoat it. They are blatant about it.

So, they intend on “disrupting” many American families with their own radical Marxist indoctrination. At least they did until it was brought to their attention that the threat wasn’t exactly smart public relations.

But is their goal something to work towards? Is the classic American nuclear family a bygone relic that should be scrapped?

The Wall Street Journal reports:

“As for the benefits of the nuclear family, today Congress’s Joint Economic Committee issued a report by committee staffers Rachel Sheffield and Scott Winship. The report is called ‘The Demise of the Happy Two-Parent Home’ and explains why this trend is nothing to celebrate:

Researchers have well established that children raised by married parents do better on a wide array of outcomes. They have stronger relationships with their parents, particularly with their fathers. They are also much less likely to experience physical, emotional or sexual abuse.

They have better health, exhibit less aggression, are less likely to engage in delinquent behavior, have greater educational achievement, and earn more as adults. They are also far less likely to live in poverty.

The report also quotes Princeton sociologist Sara McLanahan: ‘If we were asked to design a system for making sure that children’s basic needs were met, we would probably come up with something quite similar to the two-parent ideal.’ ”

This is not to say that those brought up in different situations cannot thrive and prosper. But study after study shows children do better in a traditional family setting.

Black Lives Matter Is A Marxist Group

However, this view is not surprising from Black Lives Matter, as their Marxist disease motivates them to try and destroy America with any tool they can acquire.

In fact, during a 2015 interview, BLM co-founder Patrisse Cullors identifies herself and her fellow BLM co-founders this way, “I actually do think we have an ideological frame,” Cullors said. “We are trained Marxists.”

New York City BLM leader Hank Newsome said, “If this country doesn’t give us what we want, then we will burn down this system and replace it. All right? And I could be speaking … figuratively. I could be speaking literally. It’s a matter of interpretation.”

That drew this response from the president.

Black Lives Matter leader states, “If U.S. doesn’t give us what we want, then we will burn down this system and replace it”. This is Treason, Sedition, Insurrection!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 25, 2020

The president is right and America needs to become aware of what Black Lives Matter really stands for and what they stand against. By their own words, they stand against American families.

This piece was written by David Kamioner on September 23, 2020. It originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission.

The post Black Lives Matter Coming After American Families appeared first on The Political Insider.

Left Explodes On Chris Matthews After He Praises Trump’s Respect For Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Posted on September 22, 2020 by LifeZette

On Monday Chris Matthews, Chris Cuomo, and Senator Amy Klobuchar, D-MN, all aided the Republican message, Klobuchar inadvertently. Strangely, Matthews and Cuomo seem to have done it respectively out of genuine grace and accuracy.

Matthews Offers Rare Praise For Trump

Chris Matthews, not a fan of the president, said the president was “right to show respect for RBG. “True presidential behavior. Far too rare.”

It was correct and gracious, kinda. There have been times in the past when Matthews has shown normal moderate Democrat sanity, which is one of the reasons he no longer has a show on MSNBC. His leftist pals jumped on him for showing the slightest regard for the president.

Trump is right to show respect for RBG. True presidential behavior. Far too rare.

— Chris Matthews (@HardballChris) September 21, 2020

Leftists Explode

“Oh big deal,” said Joy Behar.

“He implied her grieving family were a bunch of liars today for relaying her dying wish,” former Amy Klobuchar communications director Tim Hogan wrote.

Hogan is incorrect. The president was referring to past statements in 2016 by RBG. Past the lionization now, it must be remembered RBG was a vicious partisan even while on the high court. The GOP and the president, while showing proper decorum, have not forgotten that.

“Every day. Every day, I had to go through this,” said former MSNBC host Keith Olbermann of Matthews. “I mean, anybody else see him on ‘Mission Accomplished’ night? I had to, I was co-anchoring.”

More Liberals Attack Matthews

“Oh. you must not have been watching the news …” actor Don Cheadle said.

“Did Chuck Todd repeatedly bludgeon you in the head with Chris Cillizza?” unknown writer Rafi Schwartz asked of Matthews.

“Lol. Whew these journalists are so desperate to declare ‘presidential behavior’. Go away, Mr. Matthews,” eye candy airhead Soledad O’Brien said.

How interesting. The tolerant party is not so tolerant of any disagreement.

Then over at CNN Chris Cuomo analyzed the Supreme Court controversy correctly by giving the advantage to Trump and the GOP:

“Look, this is a short-term win. I think it’s a win…I think that if they get this judge, it’s a win because if he wants people to vote for him, if he doesn’t deliver a nominee and it doesn’t get acted on by the Republicans, they’ve got trouble…I know that people say, ‘Well in races that are close.’ Who’s voting or thinking about voting for a Republican who doesn’t want them to pick a judge right now?”

And to top off the fun, Senator Amy Klobuchar slipped into coherence for just a moment.

“The people pick the President; the President nominates the Justice. That is how it works,” Klobuchar wrote.

The people pick the President; the President nominates the Justice. That is how it works.

— Amy Klobuchar (@amyklobuchar) September 21, 2020

Republicans Fire Back

Republicans had fun at her expense.

“I agree and @realDonaldTrump is the President. Glad to have your support on this Amy,” said Donald Trump Jr.

“Does someone want to tell her?? … We the people picked @realdonaldTrump! #FillTheSeatNOW,” Rep. Doug Collins, R-GA, wrote.

“Never thought I’d say this but I agree with Amy Klobuchar,” Trump campaign rapid response director Andrew Clark quipped.

Yup, a fine week already for the president and the Republicans and it may get much better.

This piece was written by David Kamioner on September 22, 2020. It originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission.

The post Left Explodes On Chris Matthews After He Praises Trump’s Respect For Ruth Bader Ginsburg appeared first on The Political Insider.

DNC Source Says Biden VP Pick Is Down To Two

Posted on August 6, 2020 by LifeZette

A source at the Democratic National Committee (DNC) has told LifeZette that the Biden search for a running mate has been narrowed down to two people: Rep. Val Demings of Florida and Rep. Karen Bass of California.

Both are black females, thus keeping with the racial quotas now in place in the deeply racist Democratic Party. An announcement is set to be made within hours, if not tomorrow.

Given Florida is a battleground state, Demings is far and away the best political choice. She presents no worse than your typical Democrat lunatic, gained national attention during the impeachment hearings, and is not prone to public communist statements and enthusiasms. Bass is altogether different.

As chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, Bass’ demeanor has been odd of late. The CBC is a hard-left group and has been for some time. But Bass recently broke ranks and did not support the defund the police movement beloved by many members of the CBC. Did she do so to make herself more politically palatable to voters and/or Joe Biden?

But the real interesting move, as hinted above, has been her turnaround on communism and Cuba. As a student radical Bass took a trip to the country in 1970 and came back with nothing but hippy drippy commie praise for the brutal island dictatorship and American foe. She even referred to Castro as “commander in chief” of Florida’s Cuban exile community.

She also called the joyous event of Castro’s demise “a great loss to the Cuban people.” That stuff is, of course, barking loony. But such was her thrall to savage communism that it was her mission to spread the gospel of Marxist glory to this country. But now that power beckons she likely has not changed her views, just what she says in public. Thus, on NBC…

WATCH: Rep. Karen Bass (D-Calif.) says "lesson learned" about how she described the Castro regime. #IfItsSunday #MTP

Bass: I 'don’t consider myself a Castro sympathizer' pic.twitter.com/Lnpg5WfgRs

— Meet the Press (@MeetThePress) August 2, 2020

“There were over 100 young people there, and all of us worked on different issues. We had the ability to come home and protest against our own government, but the Cuban people most certainly cannot do that. They couldn’t do it then and they can’t do it now,” said Bass.

If she understood that why did she sing from the Cuban communist hymnal for several decades after she left the country? Why did she mourn Fidel Castro? Why did she tell American citizens of Cuban heritage that Castro was their “commander-in-chief”? Does that sound like someone who has renounced communism?

But the views of both Demings and Bass don’t really matter in the dispositive sense to the national party. Just like Kluxers of old, the party is just interested in one thing: the color of their skin. Yes, the harridans and gorgons who run and staff the Democrats also want to make sure a man is not picked for veep because the poor dears have had to put up with an inherently toxic man at the top of the ticket.

But if they win in November, they probably won’t have to wait long at all until their veep calls their attorney general and says, “Tell me about the 25th Amendment.”

This piece was written by David Kamioner on August 6, 2020. It originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission.

The post DNC Source Says Biden VP Pick Is Down To Two appeared first on The Political Insider.

Pelosi Looking At Second Impeachment Hoax Against President Trump

Posted on July 3, 2020 by LifeZette

To make sure Trump doesn’t win the presidency again or to make him pay if he does, Nancy Pelosi and DC Democrats are considering at least three new articles of impeachment against the president, media and political sources report.

I've updated Trump’s articles of impeachment with four new counts, from covid to China. What unites them all: putting personal, political gain above the interests and values of the nation. @postopinions https://t.co/gPmIvJ8P4D

— Fred Hiatt (@hiattf) June 29, 2020

House Speaker Pelosi is considering a broad front strategy and will possibly make the announcement next month or soon afterward in an attempt to steal thunder from the GOP convention and Trump’s fall campaign.

She may consider articles of impeachment, which the House Judiciary Committee will dutifully bring up, on COVID, the riots, and the new Democrat talking point on Russian bounties on the heads of American troops in Afghanistan. The charges would break down this way:

COVID- The Democrats would charge that the president, out of incompetence and failing to listen to his public health advisors, failed to respond to COVID in time and by such is directly responsible for the deaths of over 100,000 Americans.

Yes, it is absurd and is especially so as Joe Biden called the president’s initial travel ban “xenophobic.” But this country passed the boundaries of the surreal some time ago regarding charges against the president.

There are approximately 45% of the public who will believe anything negative about Trump, no matter how ridiculous. Democrats can call them out at will to make it seem there is consensus for a new impeachment drive. Collusion with China on the virus is another facet of this charge: that the president, for personal and national economic gain, ignored the virus to curry favor with the Chinese.

The riots- This article would essentially charge the president with the constitutionally vague high crime and misdemeanor of “racism” and would thus hold him responsible for the deaths and riots associated with the George Floyd shooting.

This makes no sense and it’s not supposed to make sense. None of it is. The Democrats know they can never get enough votes out of the Senate to convict even if the Senate flips to them in November. The goal is to make the president look guilty, or sparing that make voters tire of his controversies, to depress his strength with swing voters.

This specific ploy would be to increase black Democrat turnout by luridly replaying scenes of the riots and blaming Trump. Though as Democrats are at this point held more responsible on the riots than the president, this could backfire on them.

Russian bounties- Democrats will charge, again, that the president is somehow compromised by the Russians and that’s why he ignored alleged intelligence reports on a Russian military intelligence unit paying the Taliban to kill American troops in Afghanistan.

Given all intel agencies have publicly disavowed the reports, this would be the hardest case to make. Remember, none of these are designed by Democrats to convict Trump in the Senate, only to hurt him, and the nation, between now and election day and even after that if the president wins reelection.

This piece was written by David Kamioner on July 3, 2020. It originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission.

The post Pelosi Looking At Second Impeachment Hoax Against President Trump appeared first on The Political Insider.

Bolton Trashes Trump In Seething Book, Many Say Bolton Is Lying

Posted on June 18, 2020 by LifeZette

On Wednesday many media sources, including LifeZette, were given access to the manuscript of a new book by former U.N. Ambassador and National Security Advisor John Bolton. In it, Bolton is extremely critical of President Trump.

Bolton’s animosity stems from his bruised ego over his very public firing and the basic geopolitical disconnect between the neocon Bolton and the America First Trump.

But Bolton, who had access to America’s most sensitive secrets, wrote the book without official clearance to safeguard he is not compromising national security. As such, the Trump administration has gone to court to stop publication.

The Justice Department is seeking an emergency injunction halting the release of Bolton’s book, saying Bolton bypassed the necessary classification review process and that his manuscript still contains classified information. If so and it was published, the book could do serious damage to the country’s defense posture and international security status.

There are also those quoted in the book who claim Bolton is not relating the facts accurately.

A source close to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told media late Wednesday: “Bolton is about selling books, not about telling the truth.“ Bolton claimed, during an international meeting, Pompeo passed him a note about the president that read, “He is so full of sh**.” The source added that Pompeo isn’t a note-passer, and suggested Bolton should verify his claim by producing the purported note.

Other Trump officials, including veep Mike Pence, Ambassador Nikki Haley, and Secretary of the Treasury Steve Mnuchin, are telling the press that Bolton is making up conversations out of whole cloth.

The president counterattacked in an interview with “Hannity” on Wednesday night and in tweets early Thursday, Trump called Bolton a “Wacko,” a “dope,” and a “disgruntled boring fool who only wanted to go to war.” Trump said The New York Times had described Bolton’s book as “exceedingly tedious,” Trump added: “President Bush fired him also. Bolton is incompetent!”

Wacko John Bolton’s “exceedingly tedious”(New York Times) book is made up of lies & fake stories. Said all good about me, in print, until the day I fired him. A disgruntled boring fool who only wanted to go to war. Never had a clue, was ostracized & happily dumped. What a dope!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 18, 2020

Among other Bolton claims are these:

On the basis for impeachment Trump allegedly said, “I don’t want to have any f—ing thing to do with Ukraine. They f—ing attacked me. I can’t understand why. Ask [lawyer] Joe diGenova, he knows all about it. They tried to f–k me. They’re corrupt. I’m not f—ing with them.”

On the 2020 ticket Trump, “raised the widespread political rumor he would dump [Vice President Mike] Pence from the ticket in 2020 and run instead with [then-U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki] Haley, asking what I thought.”

But the most serious charges and the crux of the book deal with U.S.-Chinese relations, “Xi told Trump that the U.S.-China relationship was the most important in the world.

He said that some (unnamed) American political figures were making erroneous judgments by calling for a new Cold War with China. Whether Xi meant to finger the Democrats or some of us sitting on the U.S. side of the table, I don’t know, but Trump immediately assumed that Xi meant the Democrats.

“Trump then, stunningly, turned the conversation to the coming U.S. presidential election, alluding to China’s economic capability and pleading with Xi to ensure he’d win. He stressed the importance of farmers and increased Chinese purchases of soybeans and wheat in the electoral outcome.”

Bolton writes: “Xi had explained to Trump why he was basically building concentration camps in Xinjiang. According to our interpreter, Trump said that Xi should go ahead with building the camps, which Trump thought was exactly the right thing to do. The National Security Council’s top Asia staffer, Matthew Pottinger, told me that Trump said something very similar during his November 2017 trip to China.”

The claims that the president considered replacing Pence and making common cause with the Chinese on concentration camps flies in the face of not only the president’s public and privately reported words, but all of his actions to this point. That is why many in and out of the media have doubts about the veracity of this book. But nevertheless, much of the press will use it to bash the president.

This piece was written by PoliZette Staff on June 18, 2020. It originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission.

The post Bolton Trashes Trump In Seething Book, Many Say Bolton Is Lying appeared first on The Political Insider.