Displaying the most recent of 90901 posts written by

Ruth King

A partisan impeachment vote is exactly what the framers feared By Alan Dershowitz,

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/468483-a-partisan-impeachment-vote-is-exactly-what-the-framers-feared

The House vote to establish procedures for a possible impeachment of President Trump, along party lines with two Democrats opposing and no Republicans favoring, was exactly was Alexander Hamilton feared in discussing the impeachment provisions laid out in the Constitution.

Hamilton warned of the “greatest danger” that the decision to move forward with impeachment will “be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties than the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.” He worried that the tools of impeachment would be wielded by the “most cunning or most numerous factions” and lack the “requisite neutrality toward those whose conduct would be the subject of scrutiny.”

It is almost as if this founding father were looking down at the House vote from heaven and describing what transpired this week. Impeachment is an extraordinary tool to be used only when the constitutional criteria are met. These criteria are limited and include only “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” Hamilton described these as being “of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”

His use of the term “political” has been widely misunderstood in history. It does not mean that the process of impeachment and removal should be political in the partisan sense. Hamilton distinctly distinguished between the nature of the constitutional crimes, denoting them as political, while insisting that the process for impeachment and removal must remain scrupulously neutral and nonpartisan among members of Congress.

Thus, no impeachment should ever move forward without bipartisan support. That is a tall order in our age of hyperpartisan politics in which party loyalty leaves little room for neutrality. Proponents of the House vote argue it is only about procedures and not about innocence or guilt, and that further investigation may well persuade some Republicans to place principle over party and to vote for impeachment, or some Democrats to vote against impeachment. While that is entirely possible, the House vote would seem to make such nonpartisan neutrality extremely unlikely.

Impeachment: Sifting the serious from the silly John Podhoretz

https://nypost.com/2019/10/31/impeachment-sifting-the-serious-from-the-silly/

There are people for whom the very fact that President Trump breathes in oxygen and breathes out carbon dioxide constitutes an impeachable offense. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, who is running the impeachment inquiry that got approved by the House Thursday, is one of these people.

Is he going to run a fair inquiry? What are you, crazy? As the “impeach-him-for- breathing” crowd would reply, where in the Constitution does it say Schiff has to be fair?

Meanwhile, there are those for whom the only thing that would constitute a high crime and misdemeanor justifying Trump’s removal from office would be if he switched parties and joined the Democrats — if that! The president was on to something when he said he could shoot a guy on Fifth Avenue and not lose supporters.

For both of these camps, any factoid that seems to cast White House behavior in a problematic light is now fed through a filter — and either automatically added to the impeach file by the impeachers or to the witch-hunt pile by the defenders.

It might be worthwhile to try to tease out what actually belongs where.

Here’s how I separate out the two.

Latest Impeachment Witness Contradicts Vindman’s Claim That Key Details Were Left Out of Ukraine Call Transcript By Mairead McArdle

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/latest-impeachment-witness-contradicts-vindmans-claim-that-key-details-were-left-out-of-ukraine-call-transcript/

A senior White House official who listened to President Trump’s controversial phone call with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky testified Thursday in a closed-door impeachment hearing that the White House did not omit any key details of the conversation from the publicly-released transcript.

The official, Tim Morrison, also told House lawmakers he did not think Trump discussed anything illegal on the call.

“I want to be clear, I was not concerned that anything illegal was discussed,” Morrison said in remarks to Congress.

Morrison’s testimony contradicts that of Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the National Security Council’s top Ukraine expert, who testified on Tuesday that he believes the White House omitted from the transcript Trump’s claim that recordings of vice president Joe Biden existed that implicated him in corrupt dealings.

During a July 25 phone call with Zelensky, Trump asked the Ukrainian president to help the U.S. investigate allegations that Biden used his position as vice president to help Ukrainian natural-gas company Burisma Holdings avoid a corruption probe soon after his son, Hunter Biden, was appointed to its board of directors. That phone conversation has become the crux of House Democrats’ formal impeachment inquiry against Trump.

(VIDEO) Andrew Bostom: “Sharia ‘Thirst’, Christian Persecution, & Islamic Antisemitism”, Center For Security Policy Briefing 10/24/19

https://www.andrewbostom.org/2019/11/video-andrew-bostom-sharia-thirst-christian-persecution-islamic-antisemitism-center-for-security-policy-briefing-10-24-19/

Embedded video link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFkZh0VzemE

Comp_LT2_CSP Pres_10.24.19 for video 

Introductory remarks: Relevance of the 9/11 jihad carnage to my study of Islam

The 9/11 attacks were the triggering event which inspired my 18-years of study of Islam with a focus on Islam’s doctrine regarding, and resultant Muslim behavior toward, non-Muslims. A friend of mine, like me also born and raised in Queens, New York City, was a fireman and a physical therapist, and we were classmates at the physical therapy program at SUNY-Downstate during 1979-1980. I got his firsthand account of the destroyed World Trade Center charnel house.

Equally important motivation for my study of Islam was Muhammad al-Gameia.

After Baghdadi, Iran Should Be Trump’s Next Priority by Con Coughlin

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15105/trump-middle-east-priorities

President Donald Trump’s constant refrain about withdrawing US forces from the Middle East is… an enormous source of concern for Gulf leaders, who historically have relied heavily on the US to protect their interests. It is a measure of their disquiet that Russian President Vladimir Putin received a warm reception during his recent visits to Riyadh and Abu Dhabi, as Arab governments sought to weigh up their options in the event that they can no longer rely on Washington to safeguard their security requirements.

Allowing Mr Putin a foothold in Syria is one thing; enabling the Kremlin open access to the oil-rich Gulf states is quite another, and is not a prospect that Mr Trump should entertain.

From Washington’s perspective, the Gulf states are vital allies in the Trump administration’s confrontation with Tehran. So, rather than constantly sending signals that he is no longer interested in supported America’s allies in the Middle East, the president should seek to reassure them that, while the nature of America’s military dispositions in the region may be changing, Washington’s support for its allies remains as strong as ever.

Mr Trump might do well to understand that having the Gulf states on his side is vital if he is to succeed in his campaign to force Tehran to renegotiate the flawed nuclear deal. Preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons is, after all, just as important for the Trump administration as destroying the terrorist masterminds that run ISIS.

After all the recent speculation that US President Donald Trump is seeking to end America’s long-standing involvement in the Middle East, the violent demise of ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi has demonstrated that the White House remains resolute in pursuing its enemies.

As Mr Trump said in the immediate aftermath of Baghdadi’s death in northwestern Syria at the weekend, killing or capturing the ISIS terrorist, the man responsible for overseeing the barbaric reign of cruelty that manifested itself under his so-called caliphate, had been his administration’s number one priority.

It was to this end that Mr Trump personally authorised US special forces to undertake their daring mission against Baghdadi’s hideout in Idlib province, close to the Turkish border, even though, in public, Mr Trump was insistent that he was intent on reducing America’s involvement in what he has described as the “bloodstained sand” of the Middle East.

A Partisan Impeachment Vote Senators demanded a fair inquiry. That isn’t what the House delivered Thursday. Kimberley Strassel

https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-partisan-impeachment-vote-11572561408

The nation focused on the House this week, where Democrats voted Thursday to formalize an impeachment inquiry into President Trump. Less noticed, but equally important, was the prebuttal on the Senate floor.

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell delivered Wednesday a speech devoted to the glaring deficiencies in the House impeachment proceedings. The Kentuckian excoriated it for its lack of fairness and transparency, and listed the affronts to due process: secret hearings, the refusal to let Republicans call witnesses or obtain answers, the exclusion of Mr. Trump’s legal counsel from the proceedings. And he noted that Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s resolution would include no guarantee of a remedy. The Democratic approach, Mr. McConnell said, amounts to: “No due process now, maybe some later, but only if we feel like it.” CONTINUE AT SITE

The Impeachment Schiff Show Just as his impeachment drive is heating up, the California Democrat’s Ukrainian chimera is falling apart. Julie Kelly

After preparing a failed bill of particulars against the president—Russian election collusion, porn star payoffs, income tax evasion, obstruction of justice, the Emoluments Clause, the 25th Amendment, the Charlottesville rally, the two Michaels (Avenatti and Cohen), Deutsche Bank, Alfa-Bank, and Orange Man Bad—Representative Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) finally has Trump dead-to-rights: A quid pro quo without the quid, the pro, or the quo.

The House of Representatives voted Thursday largely along party lines, with only two Democratic defectors, to begin impeachment proceedings against President Trump. Schiff, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, will manage the initial stage of the sham inquiry; hearings are expected to begin in a few weeks. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), departing from tradition, handed off the impeachment grunt work to her most dependable grunt rather than to the House Judiciary Committee.

Pelosi pleaded the Democrats’ case on the morning of Hallowe’en, titillating her caucus of ghouls, witches, tramps, and thieves with tales about the scary monster in the White House.

“Sadly, this is not any cause for any glee or comfort,” Pelosi assured her gleeful Democratic colleagues. “This is something very solemn, something prayerful.”

But ringing in the ears of every Democrat and NeverTrumper across the land were the iconic words of #TheResistance hero Rep. Rashida Talib (D-Mich.): “We’re gonna impeach the motherfucker!” You will recall that the freshman Democratic congresswoman from Michigan didn’t waste any time before uttering that profundity. She shouted it on January 4, 2019, just hours after she was sworn in.

The worst piece of advice ever to Trump By Jack Hellner

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/11/the_worst_piece_of_advice_ever_to_trump_.html

Jonah Goldberg, writing at National Review, says that President Trump is guilty and should apologize.

In l’affaire Ukraine, the president is guilty as charged. And the best strategy for him to avoid impeachment by the House and perhaps even removal by the Senate is to admit it, apologize, and let voters make their own judgment. It’s also the best way to fend off a disaster for Senate Republicans.  

This is one pathetic piece of advice which could have been written by any of many NeverTrumpers like Boot, Noonan, Rubin, Brooks and Romney, who like to pretend they still are conservatives. 

President Clinton signed an agreement with Ukraine in 1999 to cooperate to root out corruption, but according to Goldberg, most journalists, other Democrats and several Republicans, the only corruption Trump could ever ask about would be corruption by people other than Americans (does that make sense?).  Otherwise, Trump is guilty and could be impeached. 

We know from Politico and other sources that the Democrats worked with Ukraine to defeat Trump in 2016, but if Trump or Barr wants to investigate that absolute corruption they should be removed from office and apologize for even bringing it up.

We know that Obama/Biden withheld military aid from Ukraine and Trump gave them the aid but somehow Trump is the problem. 

After watching most of the media and other Democrats the last three years, I have some advice for all current and future politicians. If you want to enrich yourselves and your families while you are in office, make sure you take your kickbacks on foreign soil from foreign sources because that would be off limits on all investigations. 

Here is some advice to all Republicans: Don’t listen to pretend conservatives, journalists and other Democrats when they give advice on what you need to do to win the vote. They won’t vote for you no matter what. They have been giving advice my whole adult life that Republicans must move left to win.

The Brexit Mess The darkness ahead — if we fail in our task. Katie Hopkins

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2019/11/brexit-mess-katie/

“Katie – what on earth is happening with Brexit?”

It’s a question I have been desperate to answer and have found myself unable to answer — as one day of uncertainty has led into the next. The word ‘unprecedented’ is commonplace in the UK right now.

Trying to give an accurate update on Brexit has been like trying to sell yogurt in the desert. It is past its shelf life even before it reaches the store.

But despite the attempts by our Remain-leaning Parliament to frustrate the will of the people, Prime Minister Boris Johnson has finally found a way forward, albeit a long way from the “Leave” we were promised for Oct. 31. Even the ceremonial 50p coins minted for the occasion will be smelted down in despair.

Bojo has called a General Election for December 12, 2019 in the hopes of breaking the endless deadlock over Brexit. And despite a desperate effort by the opposition to allow 16-year-olds and 3 million EU foreigners (who do not have British citizenship) to vote, Boris has prevailed.

The British people will go back to polls and vote for a new government to take them into 2020. Boris believes it will give him the majority he needs and a fresh mandate to Get Brexit Done and get us out of the European Union — his battle cry since he entered the House of Commons.

Synonymes – A Review By Marilyn Penn

This Israeli movie won the Golden Bear Award at the Berlinale Film Festival this year, also getting rave reviews from Manhola Dargis (NYT) and Joe Morgenstern (WSJ). Written and directed by the Lapids, pere et fils, it purports to be a movie about an Israeli soldier who has completed his service with a profound hate for the militaristic nature of his country and the determination to abandon it for France. Along with becoming an expat comes the decision to forego his mother tongue and speak only French, carrying a pocket thesaurus for assistance, hence the title.

The film begins with a quick-moving camera following legs walking down a Paris street – an homage to French New Wave cinema of the sixties. Unfortunately, Yoav, the protagonist, reminded me more of Adam Sandler than Jean Paul Belmondo and the actress who plays the love interest has none of Jean Seberg’s combination of rebelliousness and beauty. Instead of an actual plot, there is a do-it-yourself grab-bag of scenes that the audience can try to figure out. Among these are the hero’s near death from extreme cold, a mysterious decision by a neighbor to give Yoav ongoing financial support, an extended and gratuitous scene of pornography, an inscrutable scene of men going at each other viciously, a puzzling scene of a man with a yarmulke accosting people with declarations of his Jewishness, an unseen wedding, a classroom of immigrants being taught the French ethos of secularity above all.

Missing from this picture is an over-riding sense of time, place and history. There is no mention of the massive Muslim influx into France and its attendant consequence of violent anti-semitism. There is no indication of how many French Jews have already fled their country, many going to Israel to find safety. We aren’t told that the French government urges Jews not to wear yarmulkes in public. There is no background for the necessity of Israeli military strength in a middle-east determined never to accept a Jewish state in its midst. Are we to believe that Yoav is so uninformed that he knows nothing about the rising tide of anti-semitism in France and Europe? Are we to assume that he isn’t aware of how many wars Israel has fought defensively and what threats it faces now from Iran and its terrorist subsidiaries?

Ultimately, this is a movie about a young man’s rage – we could call it PTSD but that’s too simplistic for all the elements that are tossed at us. The film that’s playing at the Elinor Bunin theater has an introduction by Nadav Lapid, the director, explaining that it’s partly autobiographical. The fact that he had this experience of deserting Israel is not a sufficient substitute for an intelligent presentation of reality in his chosen art form. As is, this movie remains a jumble of free-floating emotional ejaculations – perhaps the reason for the presence of pornography.