So, we had Cohen at the House today – where someone convicted of lying to Congress got to testify…which just shows how stupid this whole thing has become. I was working a bit of over time today, and so missed the hearings. When I got home to check on how it went, this stood out:
Cohen testified that he went over “topics” that Democrats would raise at today’s hearing with lead anti-Trump attack dog, Adam Schiff (D-CA), chairman of the House intelligence committee. So the substance of his testimony was coordinated with the Democratic leadership.
And that is that – he’s coordinating with the people supposedly just trying to elicit the facts of the case. That isn’t fact-finding and oversight: that is prosecution. But the House doesn’t prosecute – not even in impeachment; the House just gathers facts and, depending, refers them to trial before the Senate or to Justice for prosecution. The fact that Cohen was getting coached from the Democrat side of the aisle means that all he was doing was feeding the partisan, Democrat Narrative. Not a word of what he said can be trusted, even if he hadn’t previously lied to Congress.
I have noticed – and so have plenty of others – that the Trump-Russia thing is rapidly morphing into “Trump violated campaign finance laws by paying off women”. Lawyers would have to really decide, before a judge, if such payments were campaign finance violations. But even if they are, such things are invariably handled by fines. Personally, I don’t see them as such – even if Trump dipped into actually donated money to pay the ladies off. From what I can gather, Trump has had a lot of women shake him down for money post-interaction. What isn’t completely certain is whether he had sex with any of these claimants. Such things are difficult to prove unless there’s a third witness or forensic evidence (like a blue dress, ya dig?). Normally, people aren’t having sex a trois; so, its “he said/she said”. But if you’re a billionaire, maybe you just make the calculation that its better to pay for it to go away than to fuss about a sordid scandal in public? The ultimate outcome of the Stormy Saga indicates that Trump may be the put-upon person in all this (though it is enormously funny, still, that Stormy will be the first prostitute to ever pay a politician). If a lot of ladies, justifiably or not, were coming out of the woodwork demanding cash for silence in 2016, then in my view that would be a campaign expenditure…after all, Trump has never hid his social life; none of us were shocked to find out he might have had a dalliance with a lady of interesting background. He wasn’t paying to hide; he was paying to get rid of so he could get on with the campaign. So, campaign expenditure. Of an odd sort, to be sure; but, still.
I don’t know the Democrats’ end game here. Clearly, the large majority of the Democrat base wants Trump impeached. They are convinced that he colluded with Russia to switch votes from Hillary to himself in 2016. So, too, do a large number of Democrat House members want him impeached. Its not a matter in the House of “can they get to 2018?”. If Nancy holds a vote, I can’t see any Democrats voting against. The only question at that point would be if any GOPers would vote along with them. But I don’t see Nancy wanting to hold a vote – such an action is fraught with peril for the Democrats. I think that Nancy would only go along with it if she were assured that at least 5 Republicans in the Senate would vote to convict (this wouldn’t be enough to remove: but it would be enough to say that a bipartisan Senate majority voted to convict, and that would be enough for political purposes). If they impeach via a party-line vote and then Trump is acquitted in the Senate, that would be a disaster for the Democrats heading in to 2020. Trump would be vindicated – and the Democrats very publicly exposed as mean-spirited, hyper-partisans. OTOH, Nancy might be forced to it: the base gets more extreme every day. They might start talking up primary challenges in 2020 for House members who don’t vote to impeach.
Do keep in mind that there is a part of the GOP – rapidly shrinking but still there – which would love to go along with the Democrats in getting rid of Trump. Flake and McCain are gone…but Romney is there along with Murkowski. Cocaine Mitch, though, can probably keep his caucus in line: remember, if the House impeaches, there has to be a trial in the Senate. It isn’t up for debate: the Chief Justice comes over to preside and the Democrats make their case, then the Senate votes. And if it comes to that, absent some really solid evidence against Trump, I think McConnell will be able keep the GOP majority in line…and even a Murkowski would tread carefully, knowing that a vote to convict would make her toxic with GOP voters unless there was clear evidence of criminal behavior to justify the vote.
And so we go on with our insane times – the most law-abiding President we’ve had in ages being dragged by people who probably violate federal laws a dozen times a week…and all of it being done in service to a stupid theory cooked up by Team Hillary to explain away their loss. Just incredible.
Democrats are holding a trial to try to convict trump of their own sins, more or less…
In a nation of laws, a crime is identified and investigated looking for evidence of a perpetrator.
In a nation of tyranny, a person is identified and then investigated looking for evidence of a crime.
I loved Lindsey Graham’s comment yesterday about the check that Cohen showed the committee that “proved” Trump had reimbursed him for paying off Stormy Daniels.
The media have been saying for a year or more that Mueller’s investigation is about to wrap up and his report is imminent. Last night on Laura Ingraham’s show, Newt Gingrich said he believed the investigation was going to continue for as long as Trump is President. I agree. The only thing that could change that, IMO, would be for Bob Barr, the new AG, to begin indicting some of the Obama Deep State players in or formerly in the FBI and Justice Dept. for the various laws they broke.
On the economic front, GDP for all of 2018 didn’t quite reach the 3% threshold that we were hoping for, but it came pretty damn close. Ironically, the government shutdown may well have been what kept it from reaching 3%.
That was quite the display yesterday on Capital Hill – reminiscent of the Brett Kavanaugh debacle and on par with what banana republics do …. good job Democrats. You really are looking out for America’s best interests.
When they started asking about a video tape of prostitutes urinating on the bed in Trump’s hotel room in Moscow and another video of Trump punching Melania in an elevator, neither of which has ever been revealed or substantiated, I knew they had reached the bottom of the barrel. Truth be told, I think they’re about out of ammo, and are just running on pure hate at this point.
I did like Cohen’s reply to the question about the alleged elevator tape—which was, by the way, presented as a fact and not as an allegation. He did not just say he didn’t believe Trump ever hit Melania, he said he and others he knew had tried to buy copies of the alleged tape when it was advertised for sale and when they tried this the offers disappeared, and they came to the conclusion that the tapes never existed, and to this day he does not believe there ever was any such tape. He was very strong on this. And then he went on to say he could not imagine this ever happening.
I think the Dems know this but still wanted to get the idea on the record, and that is a perfect example of how despicable and slimy they are.
What is funny is that they are counting on impeaching Trump for things he either never did do or did before he was president, not to mention the fact that impeachment is merely a formal accusation that basically just gets entered into his Permanent Record. (Maybe when you were in school you were never threatened with having something becoming part of your Permanent Record, but that was a common threat in my schools. “Even when you are the CEO of a big company it will be on your Permanent Record that you were heard referring to your geology teacher as Chrome Dome”.)
I was reading an article on the Supreme Court hearings about a big cross honoring military dead. Aside from the totally predictable chiming in of Sotormayor and Kagan on the side of the Thought Police, something really jumped out at me. Actually, a couple of somethings.
Monica Miller of the American Humanist Association made her Supreme Court debut arguing against the Peace Cross.
Miller answered that the Peace Cross and other similar monuments send the message that “non-Christians are inferior” and “lesser citizen[s].” She continued, noting that the Peace Cross’ reference to valor, endurance, courage, and devotion “translates to Christian valor, Christian courage,” and so on.
Chief Justice John Roberts asked if one complaint from one person should be enough to bring a lawsuit. Miller replied, “No … it would have to be that you are a member of the community” and you are “personally affected by the message.”
First, of course, is the typical Leftist maneuver of assigning meaning and motive where it does not exist. Just as the Left sees racism in every little thing, it sees things like the message that “non-Christians are inferior” and “lesser citizen[s] in a piece of stone that says no such thing. What total crap. I don’t really care what the voices in your head tell you, Monica. I really don’t care what cockamamie meanings you impart to a big carved stone, when there is nothing in, on or around it to support your paranoid and hateful assignment of its true, hidden, coded meaning.
But if your panties are really in such a twist because you read so much into a monument, then let’s put a little plaque on in that says “This symbol is in no way intended to convey a message that non-Christians are inferior” and “lesser citizen[s]”. There. Fixed without tearing down yet another historical monument.
Why should we CARE that a few Grievance Professionals fret that an inert piece of rock with a stated and previously understood message only of honoring those who gave their lives for their country makes THEM feel that it only really represents Christian valor, Christian courage,” and so on
OK, so put more words on the plaque, so it reads: “This symbol is in no way intended to convey a message that non-Christians are inferior” and “lesser citizen[s] and it honors the valor and courage, endurance and devotion of all who serve our nation no matter what their personal beliefs”.
But then we get to the part that blew my mind, when Miller asserted that only one person could demand that this monument be torn down, if that one person is just “a member of the community” and also feels “personally affected by the message” That is, by the coded message no one else has seen, that exists only in the fever swamp of the mind of a bigot.
This is an official effort, taken all the way to the Supreme Court and stated as the foundation for the case, that one single person’s personal sense of being offended because that person has read into a figure a message that he or she doesn’t like—regardless of whether that message is there or not—is enough to trample on the feelings of hundreds of thousands if not millions of others.
I was once riding a city bus when a young man sat down in the seat behind me and proceeded to explain, apropos of nothing, to the woman next to him that there is hidden message in the statement by a waiter to be careful because this plate is hot. You see, he explained, waiters and waitresses know that hot food is harmful, but they are forced to serve it anyway, so they try to warn people not to eat it by using a term their employers will not realize is a coded warning about the dangers of hot food. “This plate is hot” is really just a secret code meaning “Don’t eat this food if it is hot because that will harm you”.
In those days, this kind of delusion was considered part of a syndrome of mental illness. Now it is a major aspect of official Leftist policy. If you imagine something is there, then you have the right to demand that it be removed or destroyed even if no one else has ever discerned this sinister hidden message.
I repeat: It is insane.
I think it is an extension of the Left’s belief that to “identify” with something makes that something real. So if a profoundly unfunny person identifies as a comedian, from that point on he or she will be officially recognized as comedian. If a biological female identifies as a male, she must be treated as a male, with the massive power of the State imposing penalties for using the “wrong” pronoun. So it is a logical progression to assert that if someone with no other qualification than being “a member of the community” identifies a secret message invisible to millions that secret coded message then becomes real and must be treated as real.
My prediction: Sotomayor and Kagan and probably RBG will vote to tear the cross down.
Miller replied, “No … it would have to be that you are a member of the community” and you are “personally affected by the message.”
IMHO, this is more about erasing history than it is about being offended by a perceived religious reference. Erasing and re-writing history is one of the primary weapons in the Left’s arsenal. We’ve got two and possibly three generations that are so ignorant about history, particularly our own history, they can easily be persuaded to believe pretty much anything.
The majority of Americans don’t even remember what Democrats said last week, let alone history, and the Democrats rely on that … which allows them to say anything at anytime about any issue. The majority of Americans have the attention span of an endangered tree squirrel.
I took it as redefining the rule of the mob by redefining a mob as any one person with a grievance. Gee, it’s not as if THAT could go wrong, could it?
But you are right about rewriting history. Remember the Forker who used to howl at me when I would bring up the abuses, excesses and human rights violations as well as other failures of Leftist governance as being, and the exact term will come to me later but essentially being LOCKED INTO HISTORY!!!!!
And this was supposed to be an insult. Knowing history and learning from it was actually identified by a rabid Lefty as a moral and intellectual defect.
My prediction: Sotomayor and Kagan and probably RBG will vote to tear the cross down.
Just for the sake of argument let’s say that two other justices join them. How do they enforce the ruling? Who do they send to tear down the monument? And what happens if they do succeed in commanding some force of government to go tear it down, and that force is met by a large group of armed veterans who are willing to risk their lives to stop them? I think such a scenario is inevitable at some point.
Tucker Carlson said: But wait, what about the trip to Prague that Michael Cohen supposedly took? That was part of his collusion with the dark forces of the Russian empire!
That was in the dossier as well, BuzzFeed told us about it. Surely, Cohen would admit it now that he’s heading to prison and he’s got nothing to lose.
Well, Cohen was asked about that Prague trip today. And here is what he said: “I’ve never been to Prague. I’ve never been to the Czech Republic.
Well, yesterday Sean Hannity said he KNEW Cohen had not gone to Prague when the Dems said he did, because he and Cohen were friends and their kids were in sports together and on that day Cohen’s son was trying out for a major league baseball team and Cohen was there. If that is true, and all the details line up, don’t you think a REAL investigation would have shown this?
TRUMP IS A DICTATOR!! This is what we’re told from the party that wants to decide if a newborn baby lives or dies, who can use what restrooms, and what if any guns we’re allowed to have.
Their self awareness is abysmal
For the first time in my life I think there exists a real possibility that extremism and hatred is going to actually consume the Left to the point where they just self-destruct.
Coming from a party that wants to use the power of the State to punish people for having “wrong” thoughts, who want to criminalize lack of ideological purity.
Good article from VDH:
Californians may have once derided the state’s one-percent as selfish rich people. Now, they are praying that these heavily burdened taxpayers stay put and are willing to pay far more than what they had paid before.
That is the only way California can continue to spend money on projects that have not led to safe roads, plentiful water, good schools and safe streets.
A California reckoning is on the horizon, and it may not be pretty.
Gee, who saw THAT coming?
Aside from a few million Conservatives, that is…….
I was wondering what happened to our Lefty trolls, but it appears that they all took a break to call the Rush Limbaugh Show. Too funny!