"Unpeached!"

UNPEACHED: Endgame pic.twitter.com/XtbX9Zd1bS

— Carpe Donktum🔹 (@CarpeDonktum) February 6, 2020

A time to celebrate!

I am watching President Trump's celebratory speech in the White House. Not actually a speech...just letting us know what he has gone through. It is like he is right here sitting with us in our living room. "It was all bullshit. Dirty cops. Corrupt politicians. This is politics! We were treated unbelievably unfairly. We thought after the election the nastiness would stop, but it didn't stop, it just started! Tremendous corruption. We didn't know we were running against some very bad and evil people with fake dossiers. The dirty cops knew all about it. Russia, Russia, Russia should have taken one day but it took years."

My legal team right from the beginning said, "You don't have to worry, sir, because you have all of the facts on your side." I said, "You don't understand...That doesn't matter! A corrupt politician named Adam Schiff made up my statement to the Ukrainian president. Just made it up out of thin air! He's a failed screenwriter! Unfortunately, he went into politics after that!"

Somebody said, "Mitch is quiet." I said, "He's not quiet! He doesn't want people to know him! He has given us 191 federal judges and two Supreme Court Justices. He's a tough guy to read. I am good at reading people. He's a tough guy to read. I asked somebody, "How did you do with Mitch?" "I don't know" was the answer. "Mitch understood right from the beginning this was crooked politics!"

Next, Trump introduces various Senators who helped him. He gives Iowa's Chuck Grassley credit for causing corrupt Jim Comey to choke and admit illegally leaking and lying. Then, he mentioned the support he got from Josh Hawley of Missouri. Mike Lee of Utah is a "brilliant guy. He's difficult!
Say hello to the people of Utah and tell them I'm sorry about Mitt Romney."

"Democrats are lousy politicians, but they are vicious. Adam Schiff is a vicious, horrible person! Nancy Pelosi is a horrible person. These are vicious people, but they stick together like glue!"

"Why isn't Germany paying (countries like Ukraine)? Why are we in the United States paying? Because we are a bunch of suckers! But that's turning around fast!"

"They'll probably try to impeach me again. I have gone up against Jerry Nadler all my life, but I've always beaten him. And I'll do it again if I have to. Very unfair. Very unfair!"

His favorites? Devin Nunes and Jim Jordan! And, "if we are doing a remake of Perry Mason, the man I would pick would be John Ratcliffe! Steve Scalise looks better now than before he was shot! Two brave police officers came forward with handguns and one of them killed the shooter from a long distance. Later, a few months ago Steve was back at 2nd base and caught a ball, fell down, and threw the guy out at first base!"

Saving the best for last, Trump brings up the insurance policy discussed by Peter and Lisa, the corrupt FBI lovers. "After I fired that sleazebag Jim Comey, all Hell broke out and the dirty cops were ratting on each other. Then, they deleted all their emails!"

"What we could do working with both parties in Congress would be unbelievable! We've done so much without it! Rebuilt our military, we've cut regulations at a level nobody thought possible, we'll always protect our Second Amendment."

"I want to apologize to my family for them having to go through a phony, rotten, deal by some very evil and sick people." Then he invites daughter Ivanka and wife Melania to come forward to great applause.

"Our country is thriving and is respected again! It is an honor to be with the people in this room!" President and Mrs. Trump leave the room as someone plays God Bless America on the piano.

Trump has been acquitted on both charges

Susan Ferrechio reports in the Washington Examiner that the Senate has acquitted President Trump on both charges. Mitt Romney voted to convict on the abuse of power charge. Read more here.

"It is obvious to anyone who is paying attention that “cover-up” is the new phrase of the month and I predict that the Democrats will run with it all the way to November 3."

Roger Kimball writes in part in American Greatness,

Still, Schumer’s contention that the president’s acquittal (which he now implicitly acknowledges is a foregone conclusion) will be “meaningless,” coupled with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s insistence that the “stain” of impeachment will “forever” be attached to the name of Donald Trump, prompts me to suggest a few courses of action the president might take in his second term (some parts of which might be started even now).

First, to discourage such frivolous, wholly partisan efforts to overturn the results of a free, open, and democratic election, people who have committed felonies by leaking classified material or lying under oath should be prosecuted. A dozen or so indictments would have a clarifying and salutary effect.

I’d start with a few of the women who perjured themselves when lying about Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearings. I’d follow up with some people involved in the “Russian collusion” hoax. And I’d finish by looking into Representative Adam Schiff’s (D-Calif.) and Lt. Colonel Alexander Vindman’s claim that they did not know the “whistleblower” (Eric Ciaramella) and also into who leaked information from John Bolton’s memoir and revenge drama.

Second, as for removing the “stain” of impeachment, I propose that when the House flips to the Republicans again next year, a bill be introduced rescinding President Trump’s impeachment and publicly exonerating him of any and all wrongdoing.

Third, since the media as well as the Democrats (pardon the pleonasm) clearly enjoy the spectacle of impeachment, I suggest that Barack Obama retroactively be impeached, not for anything as mealy-mouthed as “obstruction of Congress” but for aiding and abetting America’s enemies by shoveling billions of dollars to the Iranian mullahs.

Other charges doubtless will be forthcoming when U.S. Attorney John Durham begins handing down indictments in the “Russian collusion” ruse and we have hard evidence that the attempted soft coup against Donald Trump was an explicit creature of Obama’s Administration. I’ve bought stock in popcorn companies in anticipation of this entertainment.

Read more here.

"Schiff’s never-ending Wile E. Coyote chase"

In American Greatness, Victor Davis Hanson details how Adam Schiff's lies caught up to him.

Democrats needed another “insurance policy.” But what no one who followed Schiff up his creek pondered was the monotony of impeachment, the overexposure of the off-putting Schiff, the weakness of the impeachment writs, and the general boredom of the American people with the never-ending get Trump story.

Just as Schiff sought to take credit for taking out Trump, so too will he be blamed for only further empowering him.

Read about Schiff's lies here.

"No case to answer!"

"Like a creepy old man in a porno theater, the press and the Democratic Party allowed their fantasies to overstrip reality!"

Finger-pointing

Nunes: Even after the acquittal, the hoaxes will continue!

Where the fraud started

Sundance reports in the Conservative Treehouse,

We can see the basic outline of how a fraudulent impeachment scheme was constructed through an alliance of operatives in the National Security Council (NSC) and staff in the House committees. Our nation is currently dealing with the consequences. However, if we go back to Nancy Pelosi’s December 2018 rule changes, there is clear forethought.

It now looks like the Lawfare network constructed the ‘whistle-blower’ complaint aka a Schiff Dossier, and handed it to allied CIA operative Eric Ciaramella to file as a formal IC complaint. This process is almost identical to the Fusion-GPS/Lawfare network handing the Steele Dossier to the FBI to use as the evidence for the 2016/2017 Russia conspiracy.



NSC resistance member Alexander Vindman constructs a false story about the Trump-Zelenskyy phone call; he shares the false story with CIA operative Eric Ciaramella (a John Brennan resistance associate and former NSC member). Ciaramella then makes contact with resistance allies Sean Misko & Mary McCord working within the HPSCI.

Mary McCord (former DOJ-NSD and current Lawfare) then helps Eric Ciaramella create a fraudulent intelligence community whistle-blower complaint to submit to her former DOJ-NSD lawyer, now Intel Inspector General, ICIG Michael Atkinson.

…And that’s how this entire Impeachment operation gets started.

The “whistle-blower”, Eric Ciaramella, had prior contact with the staff of the committee. This is admitted. So essentially the “whistle-blower” had contact with Sean Misko and/or Mary McCord; and then ICIG Michael Atkinson modified the whistle-blower rules to facilitate the outcome.

There is the origination. That’s where the fraud starts.

The coordination between Misko-McCord, the Whistle-blower (Ciaramella) and Michael Atkinson is why HPSCI Chairman Adam Schiff will not release the transcript from Atkinson’s testimony.

With that basic network in mind, if we go back through Pelosi’s rule changes there is a clear design to facilitate exactly this process.

Read more here.

Gingrich: "This is a Schiff problem. This guy really is a pathological liar!"

Trump's brand of prosperity and strength seems to be winning...

Today in his Morning Report, JJ Sefton writes in the Ace of Spades blog,

Good morning kids. Thursday and what a difference a day makes in the sham-peachment trial. I think. I hope. Yesterday, as I was tearing what's left of my hair out of my head over the potential for the RINOs to actually force Mitch McConnell to hand this over to Cuck Schemer and the Democrats, it seems as if Cocaine Mitch might have actually been working behind the scenes to whip the 51 votes needed to potentially shut this down as early as tomorrow. As the boss reported late yesterday, McConnell looks to have put a couple of take-it-or-leave-it poison pills into the potential deal to have witnesses that will no doubt be rejected by the Dems. We've all had a lot of negative history with McConnell over the years but the one thing you have to give him props for is his mastery of procedure as well as his fierce protection of his domain in the Senate and his turf. No way in Hell is he going to let four fools on our side screw him over. Along with massive political winds at his back and against each of the recalcitrant RINOs, a couple of huge developments shook out over the course of the day that seem to have sealed the deal.

First, we have fairly recent archival footage of John Bolton declaring that naturally he would absolutely lie about national security matters, presumably in the furtherance of his own preferred policy outcomes and more recently and crucially in relation to the phone call between Trump and Ukie prexy Zelensky, the one that the Dems and Bolton are claiming was some sort of strong arm shakedown but that Bolton described as "warm and cordial." Yeah, that's just how Pete Clemenza was when you were late with a "vig" payment. Lastly, as Teh Ted Cruz reminds us, Schiff-for-Brains and his comrades flat out rejected the idea of calling Bolton during the witness phase of this fiasco last month in the House.

Second, although Justice Julia Roberts, acting as the trial judge in this madness, barred a legitimate question from Rand Paul about Eric "Whistleblower" Ciaramella from being read, it is now coming to light that Ciaramella may very well be implicated in the same corruption involving the Ukrainian gas company Burisma with the Bribems. Add that to the fact that instead of following protocol and going to an inspector general, he went right to Schiff-for-Brains with the news of what he supposedly "overheard" on the Trump-Zelensky phone call.

Third, and most crucially, forget the RINOs, forget the battle over more witnesses, we now have several Democrat senators making noises about actually crossing the aisle and voting to acquit the President outright.

Taken all together, the tea leaves seem to indicate that mercifully for us - IF it plays out as we are now hoping - this ends tomorrow. Or at least this latest phase of the over-three-year attempt to bring Trump down, because you just know that something else is waiting in the wings either after he is acquitted... OR some heretofore underage, impregnated Lithuanian transsexual stripper comes forward to claim Trump is her father and that after forcing her to have an addadicktome, he will use her to rig the 2020 election by spreading coronavirus Joo-cooties with the Mossad in China at precisely 2:59:59PM on Friday afternoon.

Assuming the attempt to hijack the proceedings with more witnesses is foiled, that Trump is acquitted by close of business tomorrow or Monday latest with the extra scoop of "covfefe" crunch of one or more Democrats crossing the aisle and make the acquittal bipartisan (yay!), the Democrat Party and their cohorts in the agitprop media will IMHO suffer a rout that will have far-reaching effects both for them and for the rest of the nation going forward.

As the links in the politics section show, the rift between the old guard stealth socialists and the new batch of Shining Path Maoists is growing wider by the day and out in the open for all to see. Not really an aside but have you noticed over the past few days that Nancy "Palsi von Paulus" Pelosi has all but disappeared from the headlines and sound bite rosters? Yeah, I know, plop-plop-fizz-fizz oh what a relief it is, but it's telling in the extreme. If she's not in front of a camera for more than 24 hours at a stretch you know something's brewing. With this it sure seems like trouble in worker's paradise on earth. It's evident that she lost control of this and perhaps, the iron-clawed dragon lady dictator reputation notwithstanding, the party itself. Schiff-for-Brains and Nadless screwed the pooch big time. In fact, yesterday, the former said flat out you can't rely on what was investigated in the house but the latter belched up that this is an open and shut case. Besides tweedle-dumb and tweedle-dumber, idiots like Da Nang Dick Blumenthal and Val Demings didn't exactly help the cause. Not that there was a case to begin with.

But here again, the difference is Trump and the massive support he has and more crucially has earned both by his accomplishments and his style, which have exposed the Dems and their Media machine for the hacks and fiends they are as well as the possibilities of abandoning politics as usual for Trump's brand of prosperity and strength.

Circling back, despite the Democrats having no option but to go over the top yet again a la Ypres circa 1916, they are effectively a spent force. I mean, where do you go after impeachment? The only thing left is violence. And Bernie's Sandersnistas have already promised that Milwaukee will burn this summer if he is not nominated. As an aside, and a wheel within a wheel, now you can understand why the Left wants to take our guns away.

In any case, let your heart not be troubled, nor your shart not be bubbled. Stay tuned...

"The House managers' case doesn't stand up to scrutiny."

Acquit and move on, or mutual destruction?

Michael Goodwin writes in part in the New York Post,

Do Schumer and Pelosi want to sacrifice Biden in a bid to damage Trump?

That’s the choice they face. Either the nation moves on to other business and the election, or the parties engage in mutual destruction over Bolton and the Bidens.

Acquittal and moving on is my hope. Mutual destruction is my fear.

Read more here.

So what?

Dov Fischer writes in the American Spectator,

This whole Pelosi Stillborn Impeachment is turning into a bigger circus every day. Let’s just hypothesize that President Trump said to John Bolton that he would not give Ukraine any funds authorized by Congress until they investigated Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, Moe Biden, Larry Biden, Curly Biden, Sneezy Biden, Sleepy Biden, Grumpy Biden, Doc Biden, Bashful Biden, Happy Biden, and of course Dopey Biden. So what?

Seriously, so what? As a matter of undeniable fact, Trump gave the money to Ukraine. He gave it within the time assigned to dispense it. He gave it even though Ukraine did not investigate the Biden Billion Bribery Buying Burisma. Ukraine did not even perceive that Trump had held up any money until Politico wrote it a month later. What’s the problem?

Again — it is all another Democrat smokescreen, coordinated with their Corrupt Journalist Corps. Who cares what Bolton wrote? If he even wrote it. Even if it is true. What’s the difference? Since when do we Americans put people on trial for what they were thinking? They did that in Nazi Europe and in the Soviet Union. Do we do that here? Who cares what Trump wanted to do — but never actually did? Do you know how many men in this country today would be in prison on rape or sexual harassment convictions if they could be tried for things they thought about doing or wanted to do? Jimmy Carter lusted in his heart — how many years’ imprisonment did he get? Do you know how many spouses today would be in prison for murder if they could be convicted for what they contemplated doing before, during, or after divorce proceedings? Do you know how many New York Mets fans would be in prison today if they could be convicted for what they thought of doing or wished they could do — or still would like to do — to Mets management?

...Amidst all the nonsense, Trump — because he is so utterly annoying to those whom he annoys — also inadvertently has exposed the character of people on the Republican side of the aisle. He was vicious and nasty to Ted Cruz during the 2016 primaries, even taking cheap shots at Cruz’s father and wife. What have we learned of Ted Cruz? That man is even finer than many of us perceived initially. He is a solid Trump backer. He knows what matters. He has kept his eyes on the prize. Same with Rand Paul. Trump went after him in a personal way, even after his looks. Trump went after Lindsey Graham, even revealing the guy’s phone number. Remember? And yet both of them, Paul and Graham, have emerged among the strongest of Trump allies, focused on what matters, what counts for the country’s best interests.

And then there are the others, the Grudge Holders, the moral midgets. Hillary Clinton still hates Bernie Sanders for running against her; she cannot stop her invective. John McCain did not want Sarah Palin at his funeral. And Mitt Romney — what a small, small man! When he was our alternative to Obama — not our choice, but our alternative— we nevertheless dutifully voted for him. And now Trump inherited his voters and won the presidency that Romney blew. With each passing day, we learn more and more about how small he is. As for John Bolton, many of us really valued him in many ways, so disappointment looms. Yet, in all fairness to Bolton, that jury still is out. Let us see what transpires with him. Even so, no matter how it transpires — in the end it all comes down to the same two words:

So what?

Read more here.

Credibility

In the American Thinker, Clarice Feldman writes in part,

The coronavirus appears terrifying and hard to contain, but to keep some perspective, 6600 people in the U.S. have died of influenza in the U.S. this year.

Influenza is a greater threat to you than the coronavirus. But the coronavirus may prove a bigger threat to China’s leaders, just as the Democrats’ impeachment folly is less of a threat to the President than it is to their own credibility and power.

Read more here.

"Don't build your fortress on quicksand!"

In National Review, Andy McCarthy writes,

Don’t build your fortress on quicksand.

That’s been my unsolicited advice for President Trump and his legal team. You always want the foundation of your defense to be something that is true, that you are sure you can prove, and that will not change.

Instead, the president and his team decided to make a stand on ground that could not be defended, on facts that were unfolding and bound to change. Last night, that ground predictably shifted. In a soon-to-be-published memoir, former White House national-security adviser John Bolton asserts that the president withheld $391 million in defense aid in order to pressure Ukraine into investigating Trump’s potential 2020 election opponent, former vice president Joe Biden.

For months, I’ve been arguing that the president’s team should stop claiming there was no quid pro quo conditioning the defense aid Congress had authorized for Ukraine on Kyiv’s conducting of investigations the president wanted. Trials and impeachment itself are unpredictable. You don’t know what previously undisclosed facts might emerge during the trial that could turn the momentum against you. So you want to mount your best defense, the one that can withstand any damaging new revelations.

Here, the president’s best defense has always been that Ukraine got its security aid, and President Volodymyr Zelensky got his coveted high-profile audience with the president of the United States (albeit at the U.N., rather than at the White House). Kyiv barely knew defense aid was being withheld, the very temporary delay had no impact whatsoever on Ukraine’s capacity to counter Russian aggression, and Zelensky was required neither to order nor to announce any investigation of the Bidens.

...Prosecutors do not need someone to admit, “there is a quid pro quo” in order to prove one. And when someone says, “there is no quid pro quo,” but then acts as if there is one (under different names, such as “stalemate” and “do the right thing”), that can actually improve the prosecutor’s case.

...They could have stayed on the ground where they are strongest: Nothing happened. All foreign policy involves pressure and quid pro quo. There is a good-faith basis to suspect the Bidens were involved in corrupt self-dealing. It is ridiculous to suggest that Ukraine’s defense, let alone American national security, was in any way compromised. President Trump has done much more to protect Ukraine from Russia than President Obama and the Democrats did — indeed, some of the Democratic House impeachment managers voted against the very aid to Ukraine, the brief, inconsequential withholding of which they now feign outrage about.

Ukraine is a pervasively corrupt country. One minute Paul Manafort is a top political consultant to the regime, the next minute they have him under investigation. That is how it goes in Kyiv, where the party in power routinely persecutes political adversaries and attempts to curry favor with its Western supporters. Ukrainian investigations have no credibility. Americans might care deeply if Biden’s son is shown to have been cashing in on his father’s political influence — which such investigative journalists as Peter Schweizer have been illustrating. But Americans would put no stock in any Ukrainian investigation. As best we can tell, even if they announced they were investigating Biden today, they’d be erecting a statue of him by next month if his polls improve. Who cares?

On Monday, the president’s defense team is supposed to be arguing their main defense in the Senate impeachment trial. It should be focused on these ultimate issues. They should be in a strong position to contend that all the witnesses and documents Democrats want to subpoena cannot alter the stubborn fact that nothing of consequence happened in Ukraine — certainly nothing worthy of impeaching and removing a duly elected president nine months before Election Day.

But they decided to contest the underlying facts, where the president’s case is weakest. They decided to fight on quid pro quo . . . so now they will have to deal with John Bolton’s account and the rising demands that he be called as a witness.

Read more here.

Truth as a defense?

Dov Fischer writes in the American Spectator,

...After three years of Democrat phony accusations and hoax investigations by them and their Corrupt Journalist Corps into every imaginable lie and rabbit hole, followed by half a year of Pelosi-Schiff-Nadler lies over the Ukraine phone call, the moment finally came for one rare week to unfold in Washington when, like it or not, the argument for President Trump finally gets to be heard through the interference by the corrupt media. Interestingly, his defense team seems to have come up with a novel theory for putting forward the President’s case: Truth.

Really, that is all there is to the Trump defense. Truth. That’s all.

...Of course, the Corrupt Journalist Corps will lie all week, will do its most to avoid covering the Trump defense these next several days, will do its utmost to twist and pervert every word of truth presented in defense. But this will be a week like the last weeks of a Presidential election campaign when, after three years and ten months of blacking-out the President’s side of the story, the media cannot help but give that side some significant air time because the matter becomes so front-center in the American consciousness for a few days that it cannot be swept under a rug. This will be one of those weeks.

After three years of stifling mendacity, enjoy the air this week. The forecast is for three or four days of Truth before the fog returns.

Read more here as he gives detailed examples of truth-telling.

Trial by Charlatons

In the American Spectator George Neumayr writes in part,

Leave it to the Democrats, the party of projection, to crucify Trump for a “high crime” they alone committed, under a Constitution they long ago disregarded.

Read more here.

"history gave way to histrionics."

In the New York Post, Michael Goodwin does not think much of what Senator Schumer had to say in the impeachment trial.

Schumer’s bare-knuckle approach immediately dashed the faintest hope that the proceedings would reflect the gravity of the moment and explain the unprecedented effort to remove a president in an election year.

Instead, Schumer picked up exactly where the House left off, injecting venom into every sentence and inflating his accusations far beyond what is contained in the actual articles of impeachment.

Read more here.