Posts

WATCH: Did Nadler Seriously Fall Asleep During Impeachment Hearing?; Democrats’ Impeachment Argument Again Comes up Short

By Daily Caller. Democratic New Jersey Rep. Jerry Nadler was caught on camera appearing to have some difficulty keeping his eyes open as his Judiciary Committee colleague, Republican Ohio Rep. Steve Chabot, was speaking during Wednesday’s impeachment hearing.

The momentary lapse by the House Judiciary Committee chairman was posted by the Trump War Room Twitter account, which was quick to poke a little fun with some sleep-appropriate music.

In fairness to Nadler, staying away during the entirety of Wednesday’s hearings would have been a monumental task for anyone. It included the testimony of four legal scholars, three of whom were invited by Democrats. (Read more from “WATCH: Did Nadler Seriously Fall Asleep During Impeachment Hearing?” HERE)

_______________________________________________________

Democrats’ Impeachment Argument Again Comes up Short

By New York Post. The impeachment inquiry against President Trump took an important turn in the first House Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday.

Judging by the opening remarks of Chairman Jerry Nadler and the opening testimony of constitutional law professors, congressional Democrats are moving away from bribery. Instead, they have shifted their impeachment case, now accusing the president of having abused his office.

Before this latest hearing, it was peculiar that there were yet no proposed articles of impeachment. In prior impeachment cases, legal experts have been called to offer their views on such articles the House had already formulated. That is, the experts were asked to determine whether the allegations squared with the Framers’ conception of impeachable offenses, namely, “treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

Those impeachment cases, however, involved clear allegations of law-breaking. With Trump, the difficulty Democrats have had from the start is the lack of a clear law violation. . .

It certainly helps to have a prosecutable crime to impeach a president. Politically speaking, it is very difficult to convince the American people of the necessity of removing a president from power without proving that he broke the law. But as a matter of constitutional law, such proof isn’t required. (Read more from “Democrats’ Impeachment Argument Again Comes up Short” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Democratic Law Professor: It Is Wrong to Impeach Trump Just Because You’re All Mad (VIDEO)

Speaking during a House Judiciary Committee hearing Wednesday morning, George Washington University Law Professor Jonathan Turley called out Democrats and fellow members of the panel for moving forward with impeachment because “everyone is mad.”

“I get it. You’re mad. The president’s mad. My Republican friends are mad. My Democratic friends are mad. My wife is mad. My kids are mad. Even my dog seems mad and Luna is a golden-doodle and they don’t get mad. So, we’re all mad. Where has it taken us? Will a slipshod impeachment make us less mad or will it only give an invitation for the madness to follow in every future administration? That is why this is wrong…it’s wrong because this is not how you impeach an American president,” Turley argued, adding that the evidence Democrats are using is severely lacking, the process is rushed and that a number of witnesses haven’t been subpoenaed.

“I am concerned about lowering impeachment standards to fit a paucity of evidence and an abundance of anger. If the House proceeds solely on the Ukrainian allegations, this impeachment would stand out among modern impeachments as the shortest proceeding, with the thinnest evidentiary record, and the narrowest grounds ever used to impeach a president. That does not bode well for future presidents who are working in a country often sharply and, at times, bitterly divided,” he said.

(Read more from “Democratic Law Professor: It Is Wrong to Impeach Trump Just Because You’re All Mad” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Impeachment Witness List Loaded with Trump Critics

House Democrats announced a list of four constitutional law experts who will testify at a Dec. 4 public impeachment hearing, and the panel will include pundits who have criticized the Trump administration and defended the impeachment proceedings. It also includes a witness who has criticized the impeachment investigation.

The Democrats have summoned Noah Feldman, a Harvard Law School professor, to testify in Wednesday’s hearing on the constitutional grounds for impeaching the president. Feldman was among the first people to suggest Trump was trying to bribe Ukrainian government officials into investigating his political rival, former Vice President Joe Biden. Democrats have adopted the term, which Feldman in September said constitutes an impeachable offense.

“What makes Trump’s alleged conduct so terrible is not that he froze aid to Ukraine for a policy purpose. What makes Trump’s alleged conduct outrageous is the appearance that he was doing it for his own personal benefit,” Feldman wrote for Bloomberg Opinion.

Feldman has called for a new special counsel to investigate Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani and Attorney General William Barr, and he also called on Democrats to make the often secretive impeachment proceedings more accessible to the public.

Stanford Law professor Pamela Karlan, a former Obama administration Justice Department official, is also a witness, Democrats announced Monday. (Read more from “Impeachment Witness List Loaded with Trump Critics” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Republicans Blast Impeachment Evidence in New Report

In a new report put together by House Republican staff on the Intelligence, Foreign Affairs, and Oversight and Reform Committees, which was reviewed by Townhall, they blast evidence presented during the hearings because nothing provided proved any of the Democrats’ allegations against President Trump in their impeachment inquiry.

“The sum of the substance of the Democrats’ case for impeachment is that President Trump abused his authority to pressure Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden…for President Trump’s benefit in the 2020 election,” the report states. “Democrats say this pressure campaign encompassed leveraging a White House meeting and the release of U.S. security assistance to force the Ukrainian President to succumb to President Trump’s political wishes.”

“The evidence presented does not prove any of these Democrat allegations, and none of the Democrats’ witnesses testified to having evidence of bribery, extortion, or any high crime or misdemeanor,” the report adds.

The GOP report asserts the July 25 phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky shows no quid pro quo, bribery, extortion, or abuse of power.

“The evidence shows that President Trump holds a deep-seated, genuine, and reasonable skepticism of the U.S. foreign aid and the need for European allies to shoulder more of the financial burden for regional defense,” the report continues. (Read more from “Republicans Blast Impeachment Evidence in New Report” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Impeachment Witness Accused of Sexual Misconduct and Retaliation Prior to Ambassadorship

United States Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland was accused of sexual misconduct and retaliation by three women. The allegations, which predate his time as an ambassador, were revealed publicly on Wednesday.

Sondland, who is at the center of the impeachment proceedings into President Trump, was accused by three women of unwanted advances. The allegations were first reported by ProPublica and the Portland Monthly.

In one case, Nicole Vogel alleged that she met Sondland in 2003 as she tried to obtain funding for a new magazine she wanted to launch — she now owns and runs Portland Monthly. While he initially liked her idea and agreed to put in at least $25,000, that offer was changed after she turned down his advances. Vogel claims that after their first meeting about the potential business venture, Sondland invited her to one of the hotels he runs and he tried kissing her.

“I remember seeing my hand drop from the door handle,” she said. “I turned around, and he’s standing right behind me, and he says, ‘Can I just have a hug first?’” She added, “As I pulled back, he grabs my face and goes to kiss me.”

She claims that during a second meeting weeks later, he kept his hand on her thigh for 10 minutes while they drove to a restaurant that was out of the way. He allegedly then changed the terms of her agreement, saying that he would donate $10,000 instead and would only do that if she raised an additional $100,000. (Read more from “Impeachment Witness Accused of Sexual Misconduct and Retaliation Prior to Ambassadorship” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Impeachment Witness Deposition Reveals Why They Were Told to Hold Ukraine Aid

Newly released transcripts from the deposition of Mark Sandy, an official at the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB), reveal that OMB was allegedly instructed to withhold aid to Ukraine because President Donald Trump was concerned “about other countries not contributing more to Ukraine.”

Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-NY) responded to the release of the transcripts from the deposition, which happened on Chairman Adam Schiff’s House Intelligence Committee, by writing on Twitter, “The transcript for OMB’s Mark Sandy was just released. The ONLY reason he was ever given why there was a hold on $ to Ukraine was “the President’s concern about other countries not contributing more to Ukraine.” NOT bribery. NOT quid pro quo or any other WACKY Schiff conspiracy!”

Sandy made the revelation when he was asked what reason Michael Duffey, a politically appointed official at the OMB, was given by the White House on why the aid to Ukraine was to be delayed.

Sandy went on to state that the requests that he received in early September about how much other nations were contributing to Ukraine came from Duffey.

The questions came as part of Democrats’ partisan impeachment inquiry hearings over Trump’s July 25 phone call with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky in which Democrats allege that the president engage in a quid pro quo. (Read more from “Impeachment Witness Deposition Reveals Why They Were Told to Hold Ukraine Aid” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Identity Revealed of FBI Anti-Trump Official Accused of Altering Document

Kevin Clinesmith is the lawyer accused of altering a document related to the FBI’s 2016 surveillance of the Trump campaign, according to The New York Times. Clinesmith stands accused of altering an email used by officials to continue a wiretap of former Trump campaign advisor Carter Page.

(Via The New York Times)

The email Mr. Clinesmith handled was a factor during the wiretap renewal process, according to the [people briefed on the soon-to-be-released draft of the Justice Department’s inspector general report on the origins of the Russia investigation]. Mr. Clinesmith took an email from an official at another federal agency that contained several factual assertions, then added material to the bottom that looked like another assertion from the email’s author, when it was instead his own understanding.

Mr. Clinesmith included this altered email in a package that he compiled for another F.B.I. official to read in preparation for signing an affidavit that would be submitted to the court attesting to the facts and analysis in the wiretap application.

The details of the email are apparently classified and may not be made public even when the report is unveiled.

(Read more from “Identity Revealed of FBI Anti-Trump Official Accused of Altering Document” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

WATCH: Adam Schiff Just Gave a Very Misleading Answer on ‘Public Support’ for Impeachment

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) went on CNN’s “State of the Union” this morning to defend Democrats’ impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump’s dealings with Ukraine.

Anchor Jake Tapper pressed Schiff on whether there is sufficient public support for impeaching the president to justify moving forward with the case. “I don’t know if the American people, especially in the battleground states [back impeachment]” said the CNN host.

To this, Schiff responded that “the public support for impeachment has grown fairly dramatically over the past two months.”

. . .Schiff is basing his answer on technicalities that may be factually accurate (yes, more Americans favor impeaching Trump now than they did a couple of months ago), but he is grossly exaggerating current public support for impeachment.

Tapper is correct and Schiff is wrong. After two weeks of public testimonies, and two months of 96% negative media coverage of the administration, Americans are increasingly at odds with him and House Democrats on whether Trump should be impeached. (Read more from “WATCH: Adam Schiff Just Gave a Very Misleading Answer on ‘Public Support’ for Impeachment” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Leftists Realizing Impeachment May Be Bad for Democrats

Democrats were on cloud nine when the closed-door impeachment inquiry began. Back then, Rep. Adam Schiff was lying to the American people about what the president said on his July 25 phone call to the president of Ukraine. House Democrats selectively called witnesses, selectively leaked testimony, and continued to fool independent voters into thinking the Democrats were actually hysterical for a good reason.

The Soviet show trial really wasn’t a good look for the Democrats, so the House voted on a bill that gave the process the false appearance of fairness while keeping the Democrats in full control of the narrative and substance of the impeachment inquiry. Two Democrats joined every Republican in voting against the bill, but Speaker Pelosi managed to ram it through. . .

Worse for Democrats, it’s largely the highly-prized independent voters who are souring on impeachment. Vanity Fair’s recent headline, “‘It Is Hard To Read This As Anything But A Warning’: New Polling Suggests Democrats’ Impeachment Push Could Alienate Key Voters,” encapsulates the predicament Democrats now find themselves.

(Via Vanity Fair)

“Alas, for the Democrats, the promising numbers of late October and early November rapidly dissipated, and polling numbers have reverted to a level more consistent with long-term opinions on President Trump. In the latest Politico/Morning Consult poll, released on November 19, Independents opposed impeachment and removal from office 46% to 39%, a number close to the rolling averages of the last few weeks. It is notable that the poll was fielded after the first public impeachment hearings. Even the compelling testimony of witnesses like Marie Yovanovitch, the former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, failed to move the needle on public opinion. That doesn’t mean further hearings won’t energize greater opposition to Trump, but it’s a little hard to imagine more effective testimony than that offered by Yovanovitch and some of her Foreign Service colleagues.”

(Read more from “Leftists Realizing Impeachment May Be Bad for Democrats” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Impeachment Backfire: Poll Shows Support for Impeachment Down, Approval of the President up

A new Emerson poll finds support for the impeachment has fallen by 5 percent since October. It appears that impeaching President Trump was only popular back when no one knew what the Democrats were so hysterical about. But now that Americans are beginning to see what a giant nothingburger the Democrats have cooked up, support for the president’s impeachment has started to fall.

Similarly, the more people learn about Trump’s handling of foreign aid to Ukraine, the more people approve of the president’s job performance. The same poll finds that Trump’s approval rating now stands at 48 percent, up 5 points since October.

Finally a president concerned about giving a corrupt regime billions of dollars in taxpayer money. Americans also have to be sickened by the testimonies of unelected, career diplomats who seem to think they’re in charge of dictating foreign policy and not the duly elected president.

At the beginning of the month, a poll of Americans found that 58 percent of respondents thought Hunter Biden’s role on the board of Burisma was the result of “bad judgement” and another 27 percent thought it was illegal. It’d be nice to get an update on that poll, or a poll on how many Americans support investigating the Biden’s apparent corruption in Ukraine.

(Read more from “Impeachment Backfire: Poll Shows Support for Impeachment Down, Approval of the President up” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE