Open Thread

Sorry I’ve been out – been painting the house and working on “Secrets”! But, here we go:

The Democrats are still trying – I guess there’s nothing else they can do but play out the farce to the end. They had their new witness give an interview and it was garbage, but wait for it: some time during the trial, someone will step forward. Probably a Deep Stater who will claim they just can’t keep silent any more…but the bottom line is that Trump will be acquitted and there’s zero chance the Senate GOP will agree to witnesses unless Trump is given broad power to call whomever he wants, as well.

Our Matt notes that the GAO said Obama broke the law in 2014 and no one called for his impeachment.

How the real world is reacting to this is shown by the Dow hitting a record high.

CNN made a naked effort to tear down Bernie and boost Warren during their debate…and I’ve seen some Bernie Bros white hot with anger over it. It is a little funny: they do seem genuinely surprised to be on the receiving end of the garbage we’ve had for decades. But, the bottom line is that the Democrat bosses don’t want Bernie…they see him as a sure loser. It isn’t about policy differences…because as far as that goes, they are all pretty much alike; it is about the (rapidly shrinking) chance of beating Trump and holding the House. But, I don’t really see Warren as the person to save the day: in fact, I think she might get beat worse than Bernie. At least there is a bit of genuineness about the old Commie. Warren is clearly dishonest and mercenary in her views and actions…an her persona of hectoring nag will turn off lots of people.

Senator McSally (R-AZ) called a liberal hack a liberal hack and all the liberal hacks and Never Trumpers got huffy about it. The rest of us laughed.

New York dropped the idea of bail – and the completely expected result is criminals going on a crime spree. But, remember, that isn’t a failure, its a feature. Our Progressives are really no more than junior league Leninists and it was Lenin’s opinion that Capitalist law is inherently unjust and all criminals are fully justified in stealing from a Capitalist system. The left wants these criminals to go on a rampage to punish us for not being Communist.

31 thoughts on “Open Thread

  1. jdge1 January 17, 2020 / 1:26 am

    Mark, glad to see you back. With comments closed on the last post for several days and no indication there would be more you got me wondering.

    “The left wants these criminals to go on a rampage to punish us for not being Communist.”

    From the L. A. Times
    1. 40% of all workers in L. A. County ( L. A. County has 10.2 million people) are working for cash and not paying taxes. This is because they are predominantly illegal immigrants working without a green card.
    2. 95% of warrants for murder in Los Angeles are for illegal aliens.
    3. 75% of people on the most wanted list in Los Angeles are illegal aliens.
    4. Over 2/3 of all births in Los Angeles County are to illegal alien Mexicans on Medi-Cal, whose births were paid for by taxpayers.
    5. Nearly 35% of all inmates in California detention centers are Mexican nationals here illegally.
    6. Over 300,000 illegal aliens in Los Angeles County are living in garages.
    7… The FBI reports half of all gang members in Los Angeles are most likely illegal aliens from south of the border.
    8 Nearly 60% of all occupants of HUD properties are illegal.
    9. 21 radio stations in L. A. are Spanish speaking.
    10. In L. A. County 5.1 million people speak English, 3.9 million speak Spanish.. (There are 10.2 million people in L. A. County.)

    Less than 2% of illegal aliens are picking our crops, but 29% are on welfare. Over 70% of the United States ‘ annual population growth (and over 90% of California, Florida, and New York) results from immigration. 29% of inmates in federal prisons are illegal aliens .

    • Cluster January 18, 2020 / 10:12 am

      Those are terrifying stats. And keep in mind, Mike Bloomberg has said that California is the model the country should follow.

  2. Amazona January 17, 2020 / 9:53 pm

    I am very frustrated at the idea of the Senate giving legitimacy to the sham impeachment by treating it as if it deserves to be considered worth a trial. Since the Left will howl if there is an immediate dismissal, perhaps the Senate could start by saying that before they embark on a trial which might create the perception of a valid impeachment they must first determine if the charges are even charges upon which an impeachment can legitimately be based—-and then spend two or three days calling various Constitutional scholars to discuss whether or not something as vague and amorphous as “abuse of power” can even be considered an impeachable offense if it is just based on disagreement with how that power is used, or if “obstruction of Congress” is an impeachable offense if it is based on a legal right of the Executive Branch to declare executive privilege. We have already heard two of the most prominent and revered Leftist legal authorities, Turley and Dershowitz, state that the stated charges do not rise to the level of impeachable offenses.

    Then take a vote on whether the Senate can even legitimately hold a trial, if the charges are baseless and do not constitute high crimes or misdemeanors–not whether Trump did those things, but whether they can be considered valid grounds for impeachment.

    i think a vote in the Senate declaring the impeachment itself so deeply flawed that it can’t even qualify as legitimate enough to justify a trial would have a greater impact than acquitting Trump on the charges, which would imply that the charges are valid enough to even consider.

    I still think some body—the Senate, or the DOJ—–has to have an investigation into the process of this impeachment. Vindman broke the law. He not only conveyed confidential information to someone not cleared to receive it, he conveyed a highly biased perception of a conversation and not its actual content. He should be court-martialed, at the very least. Ciaramella, already known to be a leaker and disciplined for it, continued his practice. Atkinson should be held accountable. And Schiff and his staff, of course, should also be investigated and charged with lying to Congress, among other things. Every person who previously stated an intent to impeach Trump before these charges were leveled should be removed from the roll of voters on the final charges, if they did not recuse themselves—-which they did not. Why do their votes count?

    We just keep shrugging off things like this, and wonder why they keep happening. We just keep giving a pass to elites who break the law, and then we are blindsided when they break the law again and create more problems.

    • M. Noonan January 18, 2020 / 12:26 am

      I agree that they should dismiss – but I guess that McConnell doesn’t have the 51 votes for that; no Democrat – not even Manchin – would vote to dismiss. But we do need a real investigation of all this – lots of people leaked lots of things and leaking is always illegal.

      • Amazona January 18, 2020 / 1:04 am

        I think they could dismiss, but only after an explanation of why the charges are so frivolous and meaningless. That is, not to just dismiss but to state that the Senate refuses to lend credibility to the claims of the House by treating them as if they are valid.

        The law has the concept of not accepting the fruit of the poisonous tree—that is, for example, if evidence has been illicitly or improperly obtained it can’t be considered. That concept should apply here as well. If a proceeding is begun based on falsehoods it should not be legitimized by treating it as if it is valid. No matter how often the House changed direction, as one claim after another fell apart, the impeachment process itself was begun under false pretenses, based upon lies and attributions of intent not borne out by fact, by repeated lawbreaking from Vindman to Schiff to Atkinson, and littered with lie after lie after lie. Perhaps if they had ditched the original impeachment investigation and then voted to start another one it might not be so blatantly false, but they built their entire charade on concepts and claims that were simply never true.

  3. Amazona January 17, 2020 / 10:36 pm

    Remember Imran Awan, the DNC-employed technology aide who worked closely with Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-Fla.) until it was discovered he and family members also working on the Hill were stealing tech equipment by falsifying work orders while simultaneously funneling members’ emails improperly onto a an unauthorized server?
    …………………
    Awan and his family had been technology aides to more than 40 Democratic Congressional members, some of whom sat on foreign policy and national security committees. Their positions allowed them access to all digital communications of those members.

    https://www.redstate.com/slee/2020/01/17/the-awan-story-basically-disappeared-but-one-judge-is-still-asking-questions

    Any of these House members running for reelection this year should be challenged with this, with their complicity in allowing a foreign national of dubious loyalty and limited (if any) security clearance full access to “all digital communications of those members”.

    These people played fast and loose with national security and then voted to impeach the president on superficial and frivolous charges, and should not be returned to Congress.

    • jdge1 January 17, 2020 / 10:56 pm

      Agreed. It’s rather astounding that something of such significant importance to national security could happen where many of the details have become know, with no apparent repercussions to anyone.

    • Cluster January 18, 2020 / 10:32 am

      The Awan story is the least reported story ever with potentially the most harmful impact.

      • Amazona January 18, 2020 / 11:36 am

        If only—-oh, if only—-the Republicans could focus on a theme and stick to it. In this case the theme of national security and the dangers of letting the Dems be in charge.

        From bowing to tyrants and dictators to giving/returning billions of dollars to Iran so they can build missiles and bombs to use against us to Fast and Furious to arming Syrians with weapons like the Chinook missiles that “somehow” fell into enemy hands and used to shoot down an American helicopter to watching in live time as Americans were killed in Benghazi to putting State Department emails on an unsecured illegal server to selling 20% of our uranium to Russia to giving access to highly sensitive and possibly classified information sent through the House server by putting it in the hands of an unvetted foreign national to refusing to agree that Soleimani was a terrorist and danger to Americans or approving of his death to wildly misstating as well as misstating what the President said in a classified phone call with another head of state and then using these lies to try to mount a coup and unseat the man American citizens elected to the presidency—-and this is a partial list—-we have enough examples of Democrat recklessness and bad judgment to hammer them mercilessly about the dangers of letting them be in charge of national security.

        There is enough here to start today with a series of TV ads on the theme of what happens when Dems are in charge of decisions on national security. The Benghazi link has never been published in the Agenda Media—-Hillary bypassing the CIA when they refused to send the weaponry she wanted sent to Syrian rebels and then that same weaponry used to shoot down an American helicopter, leading to the belief that the reason the Obama administration refused to send in air support for our people in Benghazi was their fear that other American missiles provided through the Clinton State Department would be used to shoot down more American aircraft.

        Another would be the decision to send or return billions of dollars to Iran. Another the porous nature of the Clinton email server, used also by Obama under an alias. I’d even do a spot featuring Schumer whining that he was not told in advance of the attack on Soleimani, and the twitter response that Soleimani wasn’t told, either, for the same reason.

        The Dem House of Representatives has taken a public position. We can wait till the Dem Senate does the same thing, and then we should go after the entire party in a series of exposures of the utter stupidity and recklessness of the party and its lack of fitness to lead the nation.

      • jdge1 January 19, 2020 / 12:04 am

        ”I’d even do a spot featuring Schumer whining that he was not told in advance of the attack on Soleimani, and the twitter response that Soleimani wasn’t told, either, for the same reason.”

        That would really hit the nail.

        ”The Dem House of Representatives has taken a public position. We can wait till the Dem Senate does the same thing, and then we should go after the entire party in a series of exposures of the utter stupidity and recklessness of the party and its lack of fitness to lead the nation.”

        Not that long ago the Dems campaigned in a way that sounded centrist, then once they got elected would do whatever they pleased. These days they are trying to leap-frog each other to some of the most absurd leftist ideas that ever existed and doing so publicly. I’m guessing this abandonment of appealing to the masses is in part to avoid the wrath of the extremist who in many ways control their party’s direction. Guess we’ll have to wait and see if the majority of the voting public are sober enough to understand the ramifications of what the left is striving for -or- if they’re brain dead lemmings programmed to jump off the cliff.

      • Amazona January 19, 2020 / 12:06 pm

        I was just thinking of the evolution of Leftist public statements. For a long time, the American Left responded violently to being referred to as Socialist, to being compared to Socialists. Then they started to openly discuss what they claimed are the virtues of Socialism, (erroneously) touting Sweden for example as an example of the successes and superiority of Socialism. Within a few years that led to members of Congress openly supporting Socialism and bragging that they ARE Socialists. This arc happened over a fairly short period of time, and as I saw it evolve I wondered what the calculating heads of the International Left (which is driving this bus) saw in their tea leaves that made them think the time is right for this lurch into openly supporting Socialism and promising the American public to initiate it here in the United States.

        Even so, references to Stalin still had some punch, and so did comparisons to Communism, so the response was to start defending Communism and Stalin.

        https://www.nationalreview.com/2016/01/left-betrayal-america/ and https://www.catholicleague.org/america-magazine-defends-communism/

        When rational people started pointing out the horrors of life under Communist rule, started pointing out the tens of millions killed by Communist tyrants and the inhumanity of forced “reeducation” and the gulag slave camps, it was only to be expected that an American Communist sympathizer would dismiss the mass slaughter of nearly a hundred million people as mere “mistakes” in the Communist march to absolute rule, talk about the need for reeducation of conservatives and defend the gulag system as beneficial and benign.

        https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/jan/15/sanders-camp-mum-pro-gulag-staffer-says-iowans-don/

        When the Left starts dropping its masks and disguises and starts openly touting its identity and plans, we have to pay attention. Just as so many dismissed radical Islamist statements of intent to kill Americans, too many are ignoring the blatant signs that the Left has become extremely confident in its ability to take control of this nation.

  4. jdge1 January 17, 2020 / 10:42 pm

    ” Democrat Rep. Angela Romero of the Utah state legislature sponsored a bill that would force Catholic priests to break the seal of the confessional. The pretext of her legislation is knowledge of the sexual abuse of minors learned in the confessional.”

    This isn’t the first time a politician has attempted this and I doubt it will be the last. Besides the fact that it’s blatantly unconstitutional, I can’t imagine there would be more than an extraordinary few priests who would not opt for jail over excommunication, if any. And I imagine the backlash from the people, not just Catholics, would be epic. This however does not seem to matter to those who continue to push for unconstitutional laws in an effort to reduce 2 of the most important pillars of a moral society, family and religion, to a level where the only support for any individual or group is government. Those willing to succumb to this kind of tyranny will not realize the freedoms they gave away until it’s too late.

    • Amazona January 17, 2020 / 10:44 pm

      …..an effort to reduce 2 of the most important pillars of a moral society, family and religion, to a level where the only support for any individual or group is government. …

      An excellent summary of Leftist goals

  5. Amazona January 18, 2020 / 1:35 am

    I don’t know if any of you are aware of the “Florida man” meme. Evidently a lot of very strange stuff happens in Florida, leading to countless stories of insanity starting with the phrase “Florida man…..”

    “Florida man seen yesterday driving a mini-cooper into a train.”
    “Florida man running from deputies crashes car into portable toilet.”

    Obviously, where there is a Florida Man there will also be a Florida Woman:

    “Florida Woman arrested after parents find 24 pipe bombs in her bedroom.

    Police say she also had “pistol powder, knives, hatchets, nunchucks, BB pellet rifles and handguns and books and DVDs on murder, mass killing, bomb-making and domestic terrorism.”

    So tell me, what exactly is “pistol powder”? Is that a Florida thing? And isn’t a pellet gun not quite the same thing as a BB gun?

    https://pjmedia.com/vodkapundit/florida-man-friday-tsa-wont-find-anything-on-her

    (BTW, the comment on Southern Colorado drivers is spot on, especially the reference to how hard the driving test is.)

  6. Amazona January 18, 2020 / 2:14 am

    More word salad from Ramblin’ Nan:

    “Another reporter attempted to ask her about Barr, in light of allegations made by Parnas during interviews this week that implicated the attorney general, Trump and others for being very involved in the Ukraine controversy.

    What I said that the attorney general was implicated is, I’ve said this testimony implicated the rogue attorney general who has been the puppet of the — well, I don’t know who is the puppet, Trump or the attorney general — but this is not — he says this is my attorney general — this is my Department of Justice. Really?” the Democrat leader rambled.

    “So, in any case it’s not a question of saying proof, it says what allegations have been made,” she finally concluded.

    “And that has to be subjected to scrutiny as to how we go forward but it should not be ignored in the context of other events that have happened that would substantiate some of that,” Pelosi said.”

    Got that? There might be a quiz.

    But it kind of looks like another one of her inadvertent blurtings of the truth—“…it’s not a question of saying proof, it says what allegations have been made…” Yep. None of this has anything to do with the truth, it’s all just about what allegations have been made.

    https://www.bizpacreview.com/2020/01/17/pelosi-on-process-of-impeachment-not-a-question-of-proof-its-about-allegations-that-have-been-made

  7. Cluster January 18, 2020 / 10:25 am

    I support the argument to dismiss the impeachment charges due to the lack of any substance but on the other hand the Democrats just keep pushing and keep whining so I am also of the mind to push for a long and exhaustive trial and put everyone on the stand. This could be considered “draining the swamp” on steroids and on live TV. First witness, Hunter Biden, followed by Joe Biden, followed by Adam Schiff, then members Schiff’s staff, then the whistle blower, then Vindman, followed by Lev Parnas, then possibly Devon Archer, etc., etc. I might even drag the trial out until the Durham report drops, then I would call Samantha Powers, Susan Rice, James Comey, John Brennan, James Clapper, Loretta Lynch, etc.

    This would be a good opportunity to expose the corrupt partisan bureaucratic machine the Democrats thrive on, and to expose the deep corruption that surrounds foreign aid. All aided and abetted by the media.

    • Amazona January 18, 2020 / 11:59 am

      I absolutely and adamantly feel that if the Senate is going to be sucked into a trial, it should start that trial by examining the process of impeachment that got the articles to the Senate in the first place. That is, exposing the Vindman-Ciaramella-Schiff-Atkinson collusion that took a completely misstated comment by the president and allowed it to be used in an attempt to unseat an elected head of state. They want witnesses? Give ’em witnesses. Shove those witnesses down their throats.

      Call Joey and the Bimbo and other Agenda Media people who continued to promote the falsehoods, present them with the facts known at the time and ask why they ignored these facts in favor of pushing the Democrat agenda.

      Then call a couple of people who know about Ukrainian corruption, and ask about the nature of involvement with Bursima. They don’t need to call either of the Bidens—it would suffice to call someone who can run down the list of Biden-supported foreign aid that went to nations where his son, and Kerry’s stepson, managed to land contracts that let them make millions of dollars. After this call a couple of experts to discuss the REQUIREMENT to ensure that American funds are not going to fund corruption in foreign nations.

      That would all make for a few weeks of televised testimony, which would also keep the Senators running for the presidency off the campaign trail. Then call Turley and Dershowitz to testify about presidential powers and their opinion on the legitimacy of the articles of impeachment. Then, just for grins, call some legal scholar to ask if the people who had been announcing their intent to impeach since Trump’s election should have been allowed to vote on impeachment, as they were so clearly NOT unbiased. It would be funny to see the number of Dem voters in the House whittled down as, one by one, people were named who should have been recused for bias. That would include Nancy, Schiff and Nadler, as well as Greene and Mad Max and many others. Discuss the insanity of letting the prosecutor then scurry across to sit in the jury box.

      Calling Hunter Biden would serve no purpose, nor would calling Joe. I think both would hurt the Republicans, because it would add fuel to the claim that this was all about damaging the chances of a political opponent. I would not give Joe any camera time at all, and we know all we need to know about Hunter.

      No, just dismantle the impeachment process as it was used, point out the defects in the process as it was used, point out the abuses inherent in the way it was used and point out the defects in the allegations. Don’t get sidetracked into going after the Bidens, other than testimony about Biden as point man for Ukraine funneling money into Ukraine and thereby making it part of overall corruption there which included Burisma. Keep the official focus on the overall corruption itself and don’t get sucked into appearing to be going after the Bidens. But use this to take down as many Dems as possible.

      • Amazona January 18, 2020 / 12:05 pm

        And, BTW, make many references to the fact that going into all of this in the context of a Senate trial means all the testimony and evidence will be part of the permanent record of Congress and not subject to the manipulations of the press.

        While Nan is gloating that “impeachment” will be a permanent mark on Trump and his legacy, it should be clear that the facts brought out in the trial will permanently damn Pelsoi, Schiff, Nadler and their allies while proving the impeachment charge to be a politically motivated sham and effort to use and abuse their power to unseat a president.

      • jdge1 January 18, 2020 / 12:10 pm

        ” No, just dismantle the impeachment process as it was used, point out the defects in the process as it was used, point out the abuses inherent in the way it was used and point out the defects in the allegations.”

        This is probably key to preventing the continued abuse of power they dems will most certainly use throughout the Trump presidency and any other Republican president to follow.

    • jdge1 January 18, 2020 / 12:05 pm

      Trump’s defense team: ”Retired law professor Alan Dershowitz, Ken Starr the independent counsel who investigated President Bill Clinton. The lead roles for Trump’s defense will be played by White House Counsel Pat Cipollone and Trump personal lawyer Jay Sekulow. The team will also include Pam Bondi, the former Florida attorney general and a Trump ally. Other members of Trump’s legal defense include Jane Raskin, who was part of the president’s legal team during special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation, and Robert Ray, who was part of the Whitewater investigation of the Clintons.

      Dershowitz, a former Harvard professor, is a constitutional expert who in recent years has supported Trump’s expansive view of presidential powers. Dershowitz said of himself: “While Professor Dershowitz is nonpartisan when it comes to the Constitution — he opposed the impeachment of President Bill Clinton and voted for Hillary Clinton — he believes the issues at stake go to the heart of our enduring Constitution.”

      While many of us have thoughts about how the impeachment trial should be held and/or dismissed, I’m guessing this team is experienced enough to understand the nuances and particulars of things most of us are not privy to. That being said, while in many ways the trial hurts the office of the President and the country as a whole, there are numerous potential benefits to proceeding with a full trial. First, I am hopeful that a large handful of Democrats and their operatives get implicated in their corruption, cover-ups, lies, distortions, etc…, and as a result, removed from office, disbarred, stripped of any sense of prestige, stripped of all retirement benefits, and see significant jail time. At the same time, I hope this trial generates a substantial backlash against the Democrat party as a whole that they lose control of any government office for some time to come. Wishful thinking? Maybe, but if we’re going to have a trial anyway, I hope there is major damage done to the left.

      • Cluster January 18, 2020 / 6:28 pm

        … if we’re going to have a trial anyway, I hope there is major damage done to the left.

        That would be the only reason for the trial and I am with you … I pray it happens

  8. Cluster January 18, 2020 / 12:29 pm

    Call Joey and the Bimbo and other Agenda Media people who continued to promote the falsehoods, present them with the facts known at the time and ask why they ignored these facts in favor of pushing the Democrat agenda.

    YES, YES, and YES

  9. Amazona January 19, 2020 / 12:08 pm

    Statisticians say that one out of three Bernie supporters is as dumb as the other two.

    • Amazona January 20, 2020 / 12:14 pm

      Sorry—I misquoted. The quote is “Statistics show that one out of every three impeachment supporters is as dumb as the other two”. Sorry about that.

      • Cluster January 20, 2020 / 12:37 pm

        Either way it’s funny.

    • jdge1 January 20, 2020 / 12:40 pm

      LOL – I’ll have to use that one.

      • Amazona January 20, 2020 / 3:30 pm

        It’s so adaptable—Bernie supporters, AOC supporters, impeachment supporters, etc.

  10. jdge1 January 22, 2020 / 2:57 am

    Horrific day in Virginia. Did you hear about all of the store looting, cars that were burned and flipped, dozens upon dozens of citizens hurt in fighting and resisting arrest, mounds of trash strewn all over the place as intolerant pro-gun protesters stormed the capital building??? Neither did I, because it didn’t happen. But the governor was so sure it would he declared a state of emergency prior to the protest. Fortunately, many of Virginia’s counties, towns & cities are declaring themselves as 2A sanctuaries. And, several sheriffs have publicly declared they would not enforce some of the gun restriction bills likely to be approved, asserting the bills as unconstitutional. How do you figure that will play out?

Comments are closed.