RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://amgreatness.com/2019/11/02/doing-the-impeachment-math/

Welcome to the new and improved Get Trump Daily, special impeachment edition. A couple of days ago, on Halloween, a cute kid of about 7 came to our door dressed up as a dinosaur. It was a pretty nifty costume, green with spindling protuberances, tail with spiky-things, and bits on the head that expanded in a showy way when the budding tyrannosaur pressed a button.

This had two effects: One, you could tell that it was supposed to be scary, so it was a cue to say, “Oooh!” and “Ah! That’s scary!” Two: it made the costume’s occupant feel important, and I think that was probably the major effect.

“Trick or treat.” We gave the kid some candy and he toddled off down the street to impress the neighbors and, even more, himself.

If this were a story by Stephen King, maybe the kid might have been an evil demon and his expanding dinosaur head would have devoured us. But he wasn’t and we weren’t, which, frankly, is what we expected.

Of course, we might have been wrong.

I think that the Halloween impeachment show is a lot like that tyke’s costume. “Impeachment” sounds scary. As Kryptonite is to Superman, so impeachment is to the president. It’s just about the only thing that can bring him down. So I suppose it is not surprising that you can practically smell the self-importance oozing out of Adam Schiff. Like our little dinosaur, he is mighty impressed with himself.

By the Numbers

But “impeachment” means many things. Until 15 minutes ago, I’d wager, many people believed it was a synonym for “remove from office.” But with the House shouting “impeach him, impeach him, impeach him” in tones more or less like those that emanated from that angry mob which sided with Barabbas in front of Pontius Pilate, lo, these many years ago, we have all been reminded that while the House may bring articles of impeachment, it takes two-thirds of the Senate to convict the accused and remove him from office.

Two-thirds. I was told there would be no math, but I am pretty sure that means 67 senators, when 53 of them are now Republicans. According to my abacus, that means that 20 Republican senators would have to jump ship and vote with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) to remove the president from office. How likely is that?

Given the popularity of Donald Trump among Republicans, another way of asking that question is: Are there really 20 Republican senators who would commit political suicide in order to please Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, and Adam Schiff?

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

The so-called “whistleblower” (who dd not follow the protocol necessary to qualify for whistleblower protections) could well be facing serious legal jeopardy.  Sean Davis writes in the Federalist:

Testimony by Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) Michael Atkinson revealed that the whistleblower, whom Real Clear Investigations has identified as former National Security Council (NSC) staffer and current Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) analyst Eric Ciaramella, concealed his contacts with Schiff from the ICIG in his complaint form. If the anti-Trump complainant did, in fact, refuse to disclose previous disclosures of his allegations to Congress or the news media, he could be subject to felony criminal penalties for making false statements. The final portion of the whistleblower form requires whistleblowers to attest under penalty of perjury that they have neither misstated nor concealed material facts in their complaints.

“I certify that all of the statements made in this complaint (including any continuation pages) are true, complete, and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief,” whistleblowers are required to attest under penalty of perjury. “I understand that, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1001, a false statement or concealment of a material fact is a criminal offense punishable by a fine of up to $10,000, imprisonment for up to five years, or both.”

Schiff has refused to detail the breadth of his interactions with the anti-Trump complainant or explain why he lied about his staff’s collusion with the complainant. Ratcliffe told The Federalist that Schiff’s behavior was an “outrageous offense to legal due process.”

THIS WAS WRITTEN IN OCTOBER 2016

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/10/the_art_of_neglecting_veterans.html

AND OPEN THE BOOKS DETAILS THE APPALLING STATE OF A DEPARTMENT WHOSE MANDATE IS TO SUPPORT THOSE VETERANS WHO HAVE SERVED AND SAVED OUR NATION…..RSK

THE VA’S SCURRILOUS ADMINISTRATION HAS BEEN EXPOSED BY OPEN THE BOOKS…CHECK OUT THEIR WEBSITE: http://www.openthebooks.com/about_us/ And http://www.openthebooks.com/openthebooks_snapshot_oversight_report_-_the_va_scandal_two_years_later/

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

Veterans who died homeless, wronged by the V.A. or “on a waiting list,” must be turning in their graves at the thought that those who failed them are receiving congratulations on their “achievements.”  If you happen to grieve for such veterans, the handshake between the V.A.’s past and present will make your blood boil.

While the V.A., VSOs, and the American Legion are discreet about the event, ex-V.A. secretary McDonald brags about the unveiling of his portrait to anybody who will listen.  In his blog post from October 25, 2019, McDonald spares no detail of the ceremony in his honor and rejoices over V.A. secretary Willkie’s “complimentary” and “generous” comments.  And voilà, Mr. Willkie: Donald Trump’s “you are fired!” suddenly has less meaning.

McDonald, who undoubtedly fancies himself as a connoisseur of art (during his reign, the V.A. blew millions on artwork), thanked the artist, Laurel Stern Boeck, but forgot to mention that she had already immortalized him as a CEO of Procter & Gamble.

Suitably named, the EGO (Eliminating Government-Funded Oil-Painting) Act, long promoted by U.S. senator Bill Cassidy (R-La.), was signed into law by President Trump in March 2018.  Let’s hope taxpayers won’t have to pick up the tab for the VA’s crafty antics this time.

After his theatrical tenure in the V.A., Robert McDonald should still be experiencing aphonia (from countless speeches) and tendonitis (from ribbon cutting), but it seems he hasn’t lost his appetite for compliments.  Between chairing Rally Point Networks and sitting for his portrait, he managed to squeeze a gig on Ukrainian TV.  In the country’s capital, Kyiv, McDonald acted every inch the V.A. secretary — from touring hospitals to meeting local ministers.  The ex-secretary, who describes himself as a Republican, must feel nostalgic about his days as the V.A.’s leader.  Why else would he display his picture with Obama and Biden on the first page of his blog?

https://thefederalist.com/2019/11/01/rep-john-ratcliffe-adam-schiffs-problem-isnt-that-hes-biased-its-that-hes-running-a-corrupt-process/

“The person who planted fake evidence shouldn’t be the one ruling on the admissibility of fake evidence,” Ratcliffe said of Schiff on Friday.

A former federal prosecutor who sits on the committee tasked by Democrats with removing President Donald Trump from office blasted Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., as being unfit to oversee the process. Rep. John Ratcliffe, R-Tex., told The Federalist on Friday that Schiff’s problem isn’t mere partisan political bias, it’s that Schiff has a conflict of interest given his secret interactions with the anti-Trump whistleblower before his false complaint against Trump was even submitted.

“It’s more than just bias—it’s an actual legal conflict of interest,” Ratcliffe told The Federalist. “Schiff is using his authority as a Chairman presiding over an impeachment inquiry to prevent the investigation and discovery of facts about his own actions or the actions of his staff.”

“He is essentially a witness in the trial over which he is presiding,” Ratcliffe continued. “He has a conflict of interest because his testimony is relevant to the origins of the impeachment process that he is simultaneously conducting, directing and managing.”

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/aoc-backs-anti-cop-protesters-who-jumped-subway-turnstiles-in-new-yor

“AOC backs anti-cop protesters who jumped subway turnstiles, spewed anti-cop hatred and held signs that said “Punch that cop!” “Don’t let these pigs touch us,” and “Hit em!” — DPS Reaction: NYC’s Democrat gift to America. You really want this to be our political leadership in the future?”

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., on Saturday gave her backing to a New York City anti-police protest, in which demonstrators jumped subway turnstiles and yelled anti-cop slogans to protest a crackdown on fare evasion and allegations of police brutality.

“Ending mass incarceration means challenging a system that jails the poor to free the rich,” the left-wing freshman congresswoman tweeted, retweeting a video of protesters jumping subway turnstiles in Brooklyn Friday night.

In the video, protesters are shown helping each other jump turnstiles without paying the fare, while others are holding signs with slogans like “No cops, no fares.” One straphanger who did choose to pay the fare can be heard being yelled at by a protester.

“How do you spell racist? N-Y-P-D,” protesters in the video chant. But the anti-cop chants heard in the video didn’t prevent Ocasio-Cortez from lending her support to their actions.

“Arresting people who can’t afford a $2.75 fare makes no-one safer and destabilizes our community,” she said. “New Yorkers know that, they’re not having it and they’re standing up for each other.”

Other videos and images from the same protest that were not shared by Ocasio-Cortez showed banners that said: “Punch that cop!” “Don’t let these pigs touch us,” and “Hit em!”

The New York Post reported that protesters cited both a planned crackdown on fare evasion and two controversial incidents involving police officers in Brooklyn that they say are examples of police brutality as reasons for the protest.

https://amgreatness.com/2019/11/02/how-did-democrats-get-here/

Democrats have become the party of thuggery, from the top leaders abusing President Trump as a traitor and criminal, to the Antifa black shirts beating up Trump supporters in Democrat cities. The ginned up hysteria over Trump’s election has grown with Trump’s triumphant successes with the economy and national security.

The Democrats’ motivation for the fake impeachment crisis is obvious—they have no platform and no candidate that gives them a path to the White House. What is less obvious is why three years of ugly, crude propaganda, threatened and actual violence, wearisome agitation and lies is playing so well to previously normal Democrats.

The Democrat Party has veered far left very fast, without any pushback from within the party. Their voters have turned, seemingly overnight, from normal American citizens to a deranged mob after Trump’s blood. This weird transformation is normalized by blaming it on Trump himself, and the shock of his victory. A moment’s reflection shows how superficial that derangement explanation is.

Trump did not make the Vermont socialist Bernie Sanders a powerful political force in 2016. He is not responsible for Elizabeth Warren’s desire to confiscate people’s wealth. Trump did not cause the majority of Democrats to reject freedom of speech and religion, or to prefer socialism to capitalism. How did those radicals become so powerful that they now dominate the party leadership?

There is nothing in what Trump has done as president that explains the unconstitutional attacks against him. It is the reverse—the attempt to frame and entrap President Trump and his team as traitors with Russia, was begun by the Obama DOJ, FBI, CIA and White House before his inauguration. It was the Obama Administration’s actions that necessitated the all-out attempt to delegitimize President Trump before he could expose them.