RUTHFULLY YOURS

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 After eight years of Barack Obama, the Trump administration’s record of one new regulation enacted for every eight rescinded marks a major reversal in the growth of the administrative state.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.

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

The Democrats and their lapdog media, led by Adam Schiff, AKA Shifty Schiff, lectured us for the past three years that President Trump must be impeached and removed because they had clear, compelling evidence that President Trump committed impeachable crimes.

Now that the impeachment trial has started, Shifty Schiff is arguing that the Senate must subpoena documents and witnesses to prove the Democrats’ impeachment articles.  What happened to their “evidence”?

The premise of the Shifty argument is that President Trump must be guilty of something, so there must evidence somewhere to prove it.  Democrats want the Senate to issue subpoenas so they can rummage through documents and question witnesses in the hope of finding something they can use.  The logical question is, why and how do the Democrats believe that President Trump is guilty if they have no evidence that proves that President Trump is guilty?  If they had such evidence, they would present it instead of whining for subpoenas.

The Shifty Democrats know there is no such evidence because they know that President Trump did not commit an impeachable offense.  If there were evidence of guilt then the Democrats would have it.  President Trump released the transcript of his phone call with Ukraine’s President Zelinsky, so we know what he said.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7916377/Piers-Morgan-President-Trumps-got-Davos-cheering-economy-Hillary-beating-Bernie.html

‘Nobody likes him,’ rages Hillary Clinton in a new documentary film. ‘Nobody wants to work with him. He gets nothing done.’

She expanded on her vicious personal attack in an interview with The Hollywood Reporter: ‘It’s not only him, it’s the culture around him. It’s his leadership team. It’s his prominent supporters….and their relentless attacks on lots of his competitors, particularly the women.’

She concluded: ‘I think people need to pay attention because we want, hopefully, to elect a president who’s going to try to bring us together and not either turn a blind eye, or actually reward the kind of insulting, attacking, degrading behavior that we’ve seen… it’s all just baloney and I feel so bad that people got sucked into it.’

Wow.

Even by Hillary’s standards, this was a savage assault on a man she clearly believes is an absolute disgrace and shouldn’t be anywhere near the White House.

Hillary Clinton unloaded on Bernie Sanders saying ‘nobody wants to work with him. He gets nothing done’

In fact, it’s hard to imagine a more withering anti-endorsement and I imagine it may well end up being used in 2020 Election attack ads.

There’s just one problem…

She wasn’t talking, as you may have assumed, about Donald Trump.

She was talking about Bernie Sanders, a fellow Democrat and the man who is now leading the polls to be the party’s official nominee.

It’s hard to imagine a more glorious bone for President Trump to delightedly gnaw on with his KFC as he flies back home today from the World Economic Forum in Davos.

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

While America settled in for a week of pointless impeachment agony before the Senate, Trump was in Davos speaking in glowing terms about a revitalized America which has, at its center, the well-being of the American worker. He also gloriously rejected Greta Thunberg, that neurotic prophet of doom-and-gloom, and her dead-end ideology.

Trump began with his standard recitation of America’s extraordinary economic accomplishments on his watch. What made this speech special, though, and elevated it to brilliance, was how Trump explained the philosophy that created these staggering economic benefits. For Trump, it was about doing his best for the American worker because he knew that, unleashed, American workers could create economic miracles:

America achieved this stunning turnaround not by making minor changes to a handful of policies, but by adopting a whole new approach centered entirely on the wellbeing of the American worker.

Every decision we make — on taxes, trade, regulation, energy, immigration, education, and more — is focused on improving the lives of everyday Americans.  We are determined to create the highest standard of living that anyone can imagine, and right now, that’s what we’re doing for our workers.  The highest in the world.  And we’re determined to ensure that the working and middle class reap the largest gains.

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/hillary-clinton-defends-ties-to-harvey-weinstein-how-could-we-have-known/

Hillary Clinton defended her past association with disgraced Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein in an interview released Tuesday, suggesting she would not have taken the thousands in donations to her 2016 campaign if she had “known what we know now.”

“How could we have known? He raised money for me, for the Obamas, for Democrats in general,” Clinton told The Hollywood Reporter when asked if she had any regrets about her association with Weinstein. “And that at the time was something that everybody thought made sense. And of course, if all of us had known what we know now, it would have affected our behavior.”

Weinstein donated the maximum amount possible for an individual contributor to Clinton in both the 2016 Democratic primary and the general election, which Clinton said in 2017 that she would donate to charity after allegations of sexual misconduct broke against the Hollywood producer. FEC records show that Weinstein has raised over $2.3 million for Democratic causes in his career.

Actress Lena Dunham and journalist Tina Brown have both said they informed Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign of Weinstein’s sexual misconduct and warned them not to associate with him or accept his donations.