RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2020-1-20-how-a-bumbling-fool-marches-from-triumph-to-triumph

I’m old enough to remember the press coverage of Ronald Reagan as President. It was not as uniformly and aggressively hostile as the current coverage of President Trump, but close. The gist was that this guy was a bumbling fool who didn’t understand anything about either foreign or domestic policy. He had gone to a nothing college that no one had ever heard of. All the smart people knew that the right foreign policy was to reach accommodations with the Soviet Union, but instead he put us at risk of World War III by calling it an “Evil Empire” and vowing to out-compete it. The smart people also knew that the right domestic policy was massively increasing government spending, but instead he fought to restrain the government’s domestic footprint.

The Soviet Union collapsed, and the economy soared.

I thought that Reagan was quite intelligent; but another possibility is that you don’t need to be all that intelligent to do a good job as President. All you need to do is to replace the progressive program of utopian fantasies and wishful thinking with a small dose of reality and common sense.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/01/trump-impeachment-trial-jerry-nadler-audience-left-wing-democrats/

Impeachment’s target audience isn’t moderate Republicans. It’s left-wing Democrats.

Jerry Nadler must have missed the day in law school where they teach you about persuasion. The House Democrat made a critical error early in the trial of President Trump. He didn’t just say that Republican senators, who voted to begin the proceedings without calling witnesses, were part of a cover-up. He said they had committed treason: “So far, I’m sad to say, I see a lot of senators voting for a cover-up. Voting to deny witnesses and obviously a treacherous vote. A vote against honest consideration of the evidence against the president. A vote against an honest trial. A vote against the United States.”

Easy, tiger. All Republicans did was follow the precedent of the Clinton trial. They also admitted the House evidence into the record. The vote on witnesses will arrive next week. Hysterical accusations of national betrayal won’t win the Democrats any converts. When Trump counsel Pat Cipollone said Nadler should feel embarrassed after insulting 53 U.S. senators, Chief Justice Roberts intervened to “admonish the House managers and the president’s counsel in equal terms to remember that they are addressing the world’s greatest deliberative body.” Roberts played it safe. He rebuked both sides. Nadler, though, was the reason he intervened.

Roberts had company. Nadler’s comments also bothered Lisa Murkowski, who said his accusation was “offensive.” Susan Collins put out a similar statement. Murkowski went further, saying she was puzzled the House didn’t go to court to force testimony from administration officials. “The House made the decision that they didn’t want to slow things down by having to go through the courts,” she said. “And yet now they’re basically saying you guys gotta go through the courts. We didn’t, but we need you to.” Why, it’s almost as if the Democrats are out for political gain rather than justice.

https://amgreatness.com/2020/01/22/the-untalented-mr-schiff-and-his-unwatchable-vanity/

Senators will silently endure Schiff’s prancing and twirling in his new special make-up that suppresses those rosy apple cheeks.

After a lifetime of being insulated from criticism, the Lemony Snicket character Carmelita Spats acts with unshakable confidence in her talent as a performing artist. Vicious and cruel, she subjects her victims to a twirling dance that ends with her signature sign off, “And my name is Carmelita!” Fans of A Series of Unfortunate Events—or anyone who recognizes the archetype of the “stage” child—might feel a twinge of déjà vu as Representative Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) demands the rigging of the Senate trial with rules that allowed his hippity-hoppity kangaroo proceeding in the House to reach its predetermined result—the impeachment of President Trump.

Ugh! “Do we have to watch this?” everyone seems to be asking. 

Like a family held hostage by an untalented stage child’s living room performance, there’s no escaping Adam “Carmelita” Schiff’s vanity. The House managers will get to perform their show to a captive and paralyzed Senate audience. It must be agony to watch untalented congressmen deliver nauseating speeches about supposed commands of our Constitution. 

Schiff brayed that Trump’s actions were, “the trifecta of constitutional misconduct justifying our impeachment.” 

To what section of the Constitution does he refer? The part he made up, of course. 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/schiff-hamilton-and-impeachment-11579813089?mod=opinion_lead_pos5

Senate jurors are responding in different ways to the impeachment case being made by House Democrats. “Gum-chewing, snacking, yawning and alleged napping could be seen throughout the cramped chamber,” reports Laurie Kellman of the Associated Press. But just because a prosecution’s case is boring doesn’t mean it can’t also be misleading. Senators should take care to examine the historical record on impeachments.

As for the napping allegations being leveled against multiple lawmakers, Lee Moran writes at HuffPost:

Sleepy and absent senators attracted the wrath of MSNBC’s Chris Hayes on Wednesday night as the “All In” host chastised them for not focusing 100% on the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump.
“These peoples’ jobs is to do this,” Hayes said during a panel discussion on reports that at least one GOP lawmaker had fallen asleep during proceedings and others had left the chamber for extended periods.
“I mean, this is literally the job,” Hayes continued. “If you find it too annoying or frustrating or uncomfortable to sit for eight hours and listen, you can resign tomorrow and go get another job. Like, this is your job.”

Of course many voters would disagree with Mr. Hayes and insist that the trial is a partisan detour from the job of representing the interests of constituents. Such voters might also point out that among the lawmakers charged with napping offenses, not all are Republicans.

The A.P.’s Ms. Kellman reports:

Almost immediately after Chief Justice John Roberts gaveled in Wednesday’s session of President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial, bored and weary senators started openly flouting some basic guidelines in a chamber that prizes decorum…
A Democrat in the back row leaned on his right arm, covered his eyes and stayed that way for nearly a half-hour. Some openly snickered when lead prosecutor Adam Schiff said he’d only speak for 10 minutes. And when one of the freshman House prosecutors stood to speak, many of the senator-jurors bolted for the cloak rooms, where their phones are stored.
… Well into Schiff’s second hour of opening arguments, he moved on from discussing the first of two charges against Trump.
“Now let me turn to the second article,” Schiff said. That prompted several senators to shift in their seats and smile at each other in apparent bemusement.

If Mr. Schiff fibbed about the length of his oration, the transgression hardly compares to the years he spent making a bogus claim of “more than circumstantial” evidence of Russian collusion. Nor does it compare to his false claim regarding contacts with the so-called “whistleblower” he used to trigger impeachment, nor his false claim that the “whistleblower” has a “statutory right” to remain anonymous.   CONTINUE AT SITE

https://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/479422-trump-draws-battle-lines-against-democrats-and-prophets-of-doom-at?rnd=1579723727

It is not hard to see why Democrats are desperate to use any means to prevent President Trump from standing for reelection. At the World Economic Forum in Davos, Trump defined the battle lines between himself and the eventual Democratic nominee. The president has a compelling story to tell on what he calls America’s blue-collar boom: 7 million jobs gained; record-low 3.5 percent unemployment; more women in employment than men; record low unemployment of African Americans, Hispanics, Asian-Americans and veterans; the return of U.S. manufacturing jobs; accelerating wage growth for the bottom 10 percent of wage-earners and for millennials.

It’s not only the numbers that should turn Democrats’ blood cold. Trump is going after the core voting blocs that make up the Democratic coalition — middle-class Americans, African-Americans and Hispanics. His priority is their priority: The wellbeing of the American worker. Democrats can’t say the same. Trump talks about living standards, while Democrats are obsessed with climate emergencies and saving the planet.

Cutting taxes and deregulation might sound like standard Republican fare. But no previous Republican president has tackled America’s perverse, uncompetitive corporate tax rates. After eight years of Barack Obama, the Trump administration’s record of one new regulation enacted for every eight rescinded marks a major reversal in the growth of the administrative state. 

https://www.dailywire.com/news/dangerous-historical-precedent-

The attorneys general of 21 states — predictably all Republicans — have sent a letter to the Senate opposing the impeachment of President Donald Trump.

Fox News exclusively reported on the letter, which was submitted to the Senate on Wednesday morning and called the impeachment “a dangerous historical precedent.”

“If not expressly repudiated by the Senate, the theories animating both Articles will set a precedent that is entirely contrary to the Framers’ design and ruinous to the most important governmental structure protections contained in our Constitution: the separation of powers,” the attorneys general wrote.

“Impeachment should never be a partisan response to one party losing a presidential election. If successful, an impeachment proceeding nullifies the votes of millions of citizens. The Democrat-controlled House passing of these constitutionally-deficient articles of impeachment amounts, at bottom, to a partisan political effort that undermines the democratic process itself. Even an unsuccessful effort to impeach the President undermines the integrity of the 2020 presidential election because it weaponizes a process that should only be initiated in exceedingly rare circumstances and should never be used for partisan purposes,” they continued.

The attorneys general added: “This body should never permit impeachment proceedings to proceed where they are permeated with the clearly partisan objective of energizing a political party’s base to, ultimately, influence a presidential election. Such a raw political and unconstitutional use of the impeachment power should not be countenanced by the Senate.”

https://amgreatness.com/2020/01/22/report-anti-trump-whistleblower-heard-discussing-need-to-take-out-trump-2-weeks-into-his-presidency/

Just two weeks into Donald J. Trump’s presidency, Eric Ciaramella—the CIA operative widely believed to be the anti-Trump “whistleblower”— was overheard discussing with another White House staffer the need to remove the president from office, Paul Sperry of RealClearInvestigations reported on Wednesday.

Ciaramella was at the time on loan to the White House as a top Ukrainian analyst in the National Security Council (NSC).  He had previously served as an adviser on Ukraine to then-Vice President Biden.

“Just days after he was sworn in they were already talking about trying to get rid of him,” a White House colleague who overheard their conversation told RCI. “They weren’t just bent on subverting his agenda,” the former official added. “They were plotting to actually have him removed from office.”

According to RCI’s sources, Ciaramella made the anti-Trump remarks to Sean Misko, another Obama administration holdover who was working at the NSC as an analyst in the Trump White House. Previously, he had assisted Biden’s top national security aide Jake Sullivan. It is no wonder then, that the two leapt to attention when they heard that Trump’s wanted to have the Bidens’ corruption in Ukraine investigated.

Misko went on to join House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff’s staff where  he reportedly offered “guidance” to the “whistleblower”  (widely believed to be Ciaramella) about how to handle the complaint (which sparked the House Democrats’ impeachment inquiry). After coordinating with the so-called whistleblower (Ciaramella), Misko became a top investigator in the Dems’ impeachment inquiry.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/01/trump-impeachment-trial-adam-schiff-opened-door-on-biden-witness-testimony/

If they have to testify, they have the Democrats’ chief impeachment manager to thank.

You opened the door.

Trial lawyers live in fear of that phrase.

When a trial starts, both sides know what the allegations are. Both have had enough discovery to know what the adversary will try to prove. Just as significantly, both know what their own vulnerabilities are. A litigator spends his pretrial time not just laying the groundwork for getting his own evidence admitted by the court; each side works just as hard on motions to exclude embarrassing or incriminating testimony — evidence that would be damaging to that side’s position but that a court may be persuaded to exclude because it is not clearly relevant.

For an advocate, it is a coup when the judge rules that harmful testimony is excluded. But such rulings always come with a warning label: Don’t open the door. That is, don’t do anything that makes the otherwise irrelevant evidence relevant.

President Trump’s impeachment trial has a Biden door. Adam Schiff has thrown it wide open.

The first full day of President Trump’s Senate impeachment trial was consumed by legal arguments over whether witnesses who did not testify in the House impeachment inquiry should now be subpoenaed. One proposal has surface appeal because it is reciprocal: The House managers get to call John Bolton (the president’s former national-security adviser), but then the president’s lawyers get to call former vice president Joe Biden or his son, Hunter.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/01/ghislaine_maxwell_who_was_jeffrey_epstein_close_friend_had_her_emails_hacked.html

Ghislaine Maxwell was probably Jeffrey Epstein’s closest friend. She may also have been his partner in crime, for she’s been accused of procuring and sexually trafficking underaged girls for Epstein and his party pals – pals that may have among their number many famous men, including Bill Clinton and Prince Andrew. Ghislaine denies the charges.

While there’s no word about Epstein’s little black book, people are looking nervously over their shoulders now that news has come out that someone hacked Ghislaine’s personal email account. The Daily Mail is on the story:

Ghislaine Maxwell’s personal emails have been hacked, and damaging information, including the names of individuals linked to Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking case, are at risk of being publicly released.

The revelation was made in a letter filed by the British socialite’s lawyers in the defamation case brought against her by Jeffrey Epstein accuser Virginia Guiffre, DailyMail.com has learned.

The letter was sent by Maxwell’s attorney, Ty Gee, on December 5 to New York federal court Judge Loretta A. Preska but made public last week. The letter addresses the materials that should remain sealed or redacted in the case.