Luongo: Pelosi’s Coup Attempt Is Now Open Warfare, “There Will Be Casualties”

CAP

By Tyler Durden – 12/20/2019

Authored by Tom Luongo via Gold, Goats, ‘n Guns blog,

The Democrats declared war this week. Not on President Donald Trump but on the United States and the Constitution.

What started as a coup to overturn the 2016 election has now morphed into a Civil War as Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Fran-feces) presided over the passage of a bill which creates a clear Constitutional Crisis.

And that means we have multiple factions vying for control of our government, the definition of a Civil War.

In passing these articles of impeachment against President Trump Congress has arrogated to itself powers it does not have.

The first article asserts a motive to Trump’s actions to invalidate his role as chief law enforcement officer for the country. It doesn’t matter if you like him or any President having this power, he does have it.

Read that first article and then apply it to a country other than Ukraine where Trump didn’t have ‘probable cause’ for investigation into corruption and malfeasance there.

That could be Abuse of Power.

But this happened in Ukraine where Trump clearly has probable cause.

The following is the scenario the first impeachment article is asserting as the basis for abuse of power, through ascribing political motives to the President:

One day President Trump wakes up and says, “Shit! Joe Biden’s leading me in the polls. I need to do something about this.”

So, Trump twirls his orange comb-over and calls up the Prime Minister of Armenia, a Russian ally, to whom we’ve pledged aid. Since it’s a Russian ally and Trump may have colluded with the Russians, they would be a good candidate to help him.

But Joe Biden has no history of diplomacy or oversight in Armenia as Vice-President. There’s no record of any contact of any kind with Biden in Armenia, for argument’s sake.

Trump then, during the phone call, shakes down the Armenian PM for that aid, explicitly saying he must create dirt on Joe Biden or he would withhold appropriated aid funds to the country.

Then, after getting caught, Trump tries to hide the record of the phone call by hiding behind Executive Privilege.

That would be Abuse of Power and an impeachable offenseIt would be regrettable but indefensible that the odious jackals in Congress were right to impeach him. They would, actually, be defending the Constitution and fully within their rights.

But, that’s not what happened.

Biden was put in charge of Ukraine by President Obama. He had full discretion on policy towards Ukraine and was caught on tape bragging about doing exactly what the impeachment article is accusing Trump of doing. Shaking Ukraine down for favors in order to get $1 billion in aid.

Since the prosecutor who Biden had fired was investigating corruption into his son Hunter’s involvement with Ukrainian gas company Burisma, this admission is pretty damning, showing clear personal motive to use his office to stop investigation into his family.

This is Abuse of Power. This is subjecting U.S. foreign policy to the whims of an elected official, squelching an investigation into his personal family, using the office for personal gain.

So, when viewed through this lens the first impeachment article is a complete lie. Trump didn’t do the things asserted. The transcript of the phone call with Ukrainian President Zelensky proves that.

Trump made the phone call public immediately.

The phone call and Trump’s order to review the foreign aid were contemporaneous but not conditional. If you have a non-charitable view of the President it may raise some questions, but there was probable cause here.

Your opinions on Trump do not add up to High Crimes and Misdemeanors.

The implications of this impeachment article are, however, staggering.

It says explicitly that the U.S. president cannot discharge his duties as a law enforcement official if the person of interest is someone of the opposite party or a potential electoral opponent.

It says that probable cause is not a standard for investigation only political considerations.

That’s a clear violation of Congress’ role. Congress writes laws. The President executes them. If the Congress wants to assume law enforcement powers it should work to amend the Constitution.

This is a clear example of why impeachment is a political process not a legal one. But, if they are going to act this politically, at least they should put the veneer of legality on it. Even the equally odious Republicans who impeached Bill Clinton did that.

But in asserting this as an offence Congress seeks to place the Legislative Branch as superior to the Executive in matters of law enforcement and implementation.

That’s a clear violation of the separation of powers. It may suck that the guy holding the Office of the Presidency is someone you don’t like or not willing to turn a blind eye to corruption, but doing his job is not a ‘high crime or misdemeanor.’

The second article is even worse. Because asserts the power to subpoena members of the Executive branch under the impeachment inquiry into the first article. And since Congress has sole authority over impeachment, no judicial review of its subpoena power can be made.

This is fully unconstitutional since it subverts the power of the Judicial branch to settle disputes between the Executive and Legislative branches as established by the Constitution.

Pelosi and company are broadening the definition of ‘the sole power of impeachment’ to say that whatever Congress deems as worthy of an impeachment inquiry is therefore law and the other branches have no say in the matter.

This is patent nonsense and wholly tyrannical.

Rod Rosenstein and Andrew Weismann tried to use an equally broad interpretation of ‘obstruction of justice’ to include future harm to continue the special council’s investigation into Trump’s alleged collusion with Russia.OB

Moreover it renders the concept of judicial review as laid down in Marbury vs. Madison null and void. Congress cannot just make up laws and crimes out of whole cloth and then unilaterally declare them constitutional under the rubric of impeachment.

The Supreme Court has the right to strike down bills Congress passes as unconstitutional.

This drives a massive wedge through the separation of powers in a blatant power grab by Pelosi and the Democratic House majority to protect themselves from Trump’s investigations into their crimes surrounding events in Ukraine.

When viewed dispassionately, Obstruction of Congress is not a crime but rather a function of each of the other two branches of government. It’s no better when the President hides behind Executive Orders to legislate unconstitutionally.

And it’s even worse when the Supreme Court makes up laws from the bench rather than kick the ball back to Congress and start the process all over again.

That’s what the whole three co-equal branches of government is supposed to mean.

Now, in practice I don’t believe the three branches are equal, as the Judicial branch routinely oversteps its authority. But in this case if it does not step in immediately and defend itself from this Congress then the basic fabric of our government unravels overnight.

That the second impeachment article is directly dependent on the flawed (or non-existent) logic of the first impeachment article renders the whole thing simply laughable on the face of it.

I’m no legal scholar so when I can see how ridiculous these articles are then you know this has nothing to do with the law but everything to do with power.

And the reality is, as I discussed in my latest podcast, what this impeachment is really about is distracting and covering up the multiple layers of corruption in U.S. foreign and domestic policy stretching back decades. Many of the tendrils emanating from the events surrounding the FISA warrants improperly granted connect directly to the Clintons, Jeffrey Epstein, William Browder and the rape of Russia in the post-Soviet 90’s.

We’re talking an entire generation or more of U.S. officials and politicians implicated in some of the worst crimes of the past thirty years.

The stakes for these people are existential. This is why they are willing to risk a full-blown constitutional crisis and civil war to remove Trump from office.

They know he’s angry at them now. This is personal as well as philosophical. Trump is a patriot, a narcissist and a gangster. That’s a powerful combination of traits.

The polls are shifting his way on this as the average person knows this impeachment is pathetic. They are tired of the Democrats’ games the same way British voters are over the arguments against Brexit.

So the old adage about killing the king come to mind. If Pelosi et.al. miss here, the retribution from Trump will be biblical.

The damage to the society is too great to argue irrelevancies. No one outside of the Beltway Bubble and the Crazies of the Resistance cares about what Trump did here. It’s too arcane and most people are against giving a shithole like Ukraine taxpayer money in the first place.

The whole thing is a giant pile of loser turds steaming up the room and impeding getting any work done.

In the end We’ll know if Trump has his ducks in a row in how Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell plays his cards versus Pelosi. If McConnell pussy-foots around and gives Pelosi anything on how the trial in the Senate is conducted then the fix is in and Trump is done.

But, if McConnell shuts this down then what comes next will be a righteous smackdown of Trump’s political opponents that will make the phone call with Zelensky look like a routine call to Dominos’ for a double pepperoni.

Either way, this coup attempt by Pelosi is now open warfare. There will be casualties.

*  *  *

Join My Patreon if you want help navigating what’s the next stop on the short bus to Crazytown. Install the Brave Browser to suck the money away from Google and protect your privacy.

Democrats’ push to impeach Trump is just the latest chapter of US Civil War 2.0

CAP

By Robert Bridge

The US is more divided today than at any time since the historic war between North and South, and whether or not the Democrats vote to impeach Trump, Americans won’t be spared a political storm looming on the horizon.

Today, millions of Washington watchers around the world are asking the same question: What happens if the Democrats go ahead and bring articles of impeachment against President Donald J. Trump? The answer is twofold, and just might be the shortest story ever told: At first nothing, and then, everything. The end.

The reason nothing will happen immediately requires no degree in political science to appreciate. Should the Democrats commit the mother of all political screw-ups by voting to impeach Trump, all on the basis of hearsay, gossip and maybe reading tea leaves, the circus moves next door to the Senate, where Republicans hold a majority. This is where House efforts to impeach Trump will inevitably smack into a brick wall and disintegrate.

That much was made clear earlier this week when Minority Leader Chuck Schumer demanded to call current and former White House officials to appear on the witness stand for stage two of the Democratic show trials. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was having none of it.

“I’m not an impartial juror,” McConnell retorted to applause from Senators, many of whom were thwarted in their own efforts to call witnesses and ask questions when the Democrats controlled the hearings. “This is a political process,” he added.

CAP

So, if the inevitable prospect of certain defeat in the Senate won’t stop the Democratic impeachment train, then maybe the knowledge that the majority of Americans oppose their plans will make them reconsider, right? Think again. Not even a USA Today/Suffolk University poll, which shows that Americans oppose by 51-45% any effort by the Senate to remove Trump, up from October when the margin was 47-46%, has deterred the Democrats from their witch hunt.

Trump practically thanked the Democrats for the early Christmas gift when he said impeachment is “a very sad thing for our country, but it seems to be very good for me politically.” Indeed it has been. If elections were held today, Trump would likely emerge victorious against any of his Democratic rivals.

With regards to the economy, Wall Street appears to be on steroids, smashing records almost weekly. All of this points to smooth sailing for Trump up to the 2020 presidential elections.

Despite things looking favorably, Trump is not out of the woods just yet. The reason is because the Democrats, due to their chummy relationship with the media, are still able to control the narrative. That much is clear considering how House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff has been dominating the impeachment proceedings without much criticism from the press. The initial impeachment inquiry was held without transparency in the dank basement of Congress, far away from public scrutiny. He also staunchly refused to release the identity of the so-called whistleblower, who is alleged to have heard secondhand information about the now-famous call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

However, since any impeachment trial promises to be a major televised event, the Democrats will not be able to leak to the media their handpicked breadcrumbs of information. Everything will be out in the open and discussed 24/7.

CAP

How to explain the Democrat obsession with removing Trump?

First, the Democrats’ chances of removing Trump from office are somewhere between zero and none, and they are certainly aware of that fact. Second, impeachment is proving unpopular with the majority of Americans, and that must be particularly worrisome in a major election season. Finally, the Democrats risk throwing their top presidential contender, Joe Biden, under the bus by their efforts.

Mitch McConnell and his fellow Republicans will certainly investigate how Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, for example, had come to serve on the board of the Ukrainian energy company Burisma Holdings, reportedly being paid up to $50,000 a month despite having no experience in the Ukrainian energy sector. No less interesting is the fact that Joe Biden essentially forced Ukraine to fire its prosecutor general as a precondition for releasing $1 billion dollars in US aid. In the event that Ukrainian officials are called to testify in the Senate during the impeachment trial, it could turn out to be very ugly for the Biden clan.

CAP

Considering that the Democrats have absolutely nothing to gain by trying to impeach Trump, another possible motive must be considered, which is that the Democrats are desperately trying to protect themselves. Unknown to many, high-level Democrats, intelligence officers, and former White House officials have been under investigation for many months by Attorney General Will Barr and federal prosecutor John Durham. The reason has little to do with Ukraine, and everything to do with Trump’s promise to “drain the swamp.

In a nutshell, Barr and Dunham will soon be releasing their highly anticipated attorney general’s report, which will determine whether the FBI had submitted false documents for obtaining a FISA warrant to spy on the Trump administration in 2016. The word ‘treason’ is even being whispered on Capitol Hill. The investigation involves a mind boggling array of top characters who played a role in creating the Steele Dossier (home of the famous pee tape), a largely debunked ‘intelligence’ document that ultimately failed to prove a link between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin.

Last week, after Inspector General Michael Horowitz released a preliminary report that shows the FBI committed numerous mistakes in applying for the FISA warrant, including falsifying a document, former FBI Director James Comey back-pedaled on his earlier claims that the FBI had acted appropriately. “I was wrong. I was overconfident in our procedures. It’s important that a leader be accountable and transparent,” he told Chris Wallace of Fox News.

But that is not the end of the story. Not by a long shot.

Durham, who has had access to foreign governments and US intelligence agencies not available to Horowitz, played down the IG report, suggesting fireworks down the road when he commented “last month we advised the Inspector General that we do not agree with some of the report’s conclusions as to predication and how the FBI case was opened.

CAP

Needless to say, Barr and Durham’s report has got a lot of people in high places very nervous. This could make the impeachment process a top priority in that it provides cover and would look as if Trump were attacking the Democrats simply out of rage if he acts. Clearly, the Democrats, with their groundless Russiagate theories and now an impeachment scandal, are desperately trying to buy time to avoid their own impending doom.

In other words, there is a real civil war taking place behind the scenes in Washington, and Trump’s impeachment is just one small part of the action. What is happening now in Washington DC between the Republicans and Democrats is just mere dress rehearsal for far more disasters down the road.

I just hope the costumes don’t end up being blue and gray, once again.

 

The 1st Deep State FISA Warrant on Page Was the 1 In 10,000 Denied by the Court – For Some Reason DOJ IG Horowitz LEFT THIS OUT of His Report!

 

The FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance) Court is in the news this weekend after President Trump tweeted that former President Obama had petitioned a court twice in order to wire tap current President Trump when he was running for office.  [At this time we were not aware of the multiple renewals of the Carter Page FISA warrant application used to validate spying on President Trump.]

In his first tweet President Trump tweeted:

Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my “wires tapped” in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!

CAP

He next tweeted:

Is it legal for a sitting President to be “wire tapping” a race for president prior to an election? Turned down by court earlier. A NEW LOW!

CAP

The FISA Court was put in place in 1978 when Congress enacted the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA):

The Court sits in Washington D.C., and is composed of eleven federal district court judges who are designated by the Chief Justice of the United States. Each judge serves for a maximum of seven years and their terms are staggered to ensure continuity on the Court. By statute, the judges must be drawn from at least seven of the United States judicial circuits, and three of the judges must reside within 20 miles of the District of Columbia. Judges typically sit for one week at a time, on a rotating basis.

Pursuant to FISA, the Court entertains applications submitted by the United States Government for approval of electronic surveillance, physical search, and other investigative actions for foreign intelligence purposes. Most of the Court’s work is conducted ex parte as required by statute, and due to the need to protect classified national security information.

Only two in over 10,000 applications were turned down by the FISA Court.

According to ABC News:

More than a thousand applications for electronic surveillance, all signed by the attorney general, are submitted each year, and the vast majority are approved. From 2009 to 2015, for example, more than 10,700 applications for electronic surveillance were submitted, and only one was denied in its entirety, according to annual reports sent to Congress. Another one was denied in part, and 17 were withdrawn by the government.

A very disturbing fact about the wire tapping request of President Trump is that the FISA Court turned down President Obama’s Administration’s first request to wire tap President Trump that was evidently signed off on by Attorney General Lynch. With only two applications denied out of 10,700 from 2009 through 2015, the fact that the Obama Administration’s application was denied by the FISA Court is very disturbing. The odds of this happening were 0.02% .

The Obama Presidency is clearly the most corrupt in US history.

Horowitz remains silent on this in his 450 plus page report –>>

According to the FISA Report on page 412, Obama’s Deep State DOJ and FBI decided to move forward with obtaining a FISA Warrant to spy on Carter Page and therefore candidate Trump in mid-August of 2016:

CAP

We also now know that this is when Deep State lovers Peter Strzok and Lisa Page discussed the insurance policy via texts on August 15, 2016 –

CAP

The DOJ OIG FISA Report does not mention that the first FISA warrant for Carter Page was denied.  It only states that the Deep State attempted to put together information to obtain a FISA warrant on Carter Page in August 2016 and by September, the Deep State believed they had enough information to obtain the warrant.

We know that the first FISA warrant to spy on Carter Page and Trump was obtained in October 2016 shortly before the 2016 Presidential election.  This now confirmed garbage report was then renewed three times.

Omissions like this leave the reader to question the validity of the the entire FISA Report.  Was more than this omitted from the massive report?  If so, why?

Hat tip D. Manny

Democrat Lawmakers Vote to Impeach Trump in House Judiciary Committee in Party Line Political Vote

 

Democrat lawmakers voted for impeachment of President Trump on Friday morning in the House Judiciary Committee.

23 Democrats for impeachment
17 Republicans against impeachment

No witnesses were brought forth during the committee’s hearings on impeachment.
Only left-wing lawyers and professors were allowed to testify against President Trump.

On Friday Democrats voted along party lines to impeach President Trump on a complete sham.
No crimes were identified.

Marc Thiessen writes in the Washington Post: Washington Post column: “The impeachment articles are a vindication for Trump.”

Marc writes: “After three years in which Democrats accused President Trump of a host of criminal acts — from bribery and extortion to campaign finance violations, obstruction of justice, conspiracy and even treason — they have finally introduced articles of impeachment that allege no statutory crimes. In that alone, Trump can claim vindication.”

This comes on the same week Democrat Deep State operatives were caught spying on President Trump’s campaign and admininistration.
These people can burn in hell for what they did to this country.

 

 

Don Lemon Takes On Thanos, Everyone Loses (Impeachment Part 5)

By John Ward – 12/12/2019

Dismayed by the un-respect of quote unquote THE NEWS, amateur host for boutique fanfic outlet CNN – Worst Journalist of the Year Don Lemon (Worst Journalist of the Year) – took it upon xirself to tackle the Real Issues by offering a hot and possibly infected take on President Donald Trump’s “Thanos Meme.” Listen closely, and you can hear seven distinct horn blasts in the background!

 

Eric Holder Sends Warning to John Durham, Says William Barr ‘Unfit’ to be Attorney General, in WaPo Op-Ed

by Kristinn Taylor

Former Obama Attorney General Eric Holder sent a chilling message in a very public way to U.S. Attorney John Durham–the man investigating abuses by the FBI and Justice Department against President Trump and members of his administration and campaign in the Russia-election investigation–warning Durham he is risking his reputation.

 

Holder wrote an op-ed published Wednesday night by the Washington Post calling current Attorney General William Barr “unfit” to serve as attorney general. The threat to Durham iss buried in the op-ed, but jumps out like a dagger thrust from the dark.

…As a former line prosecutor, U.S. attorney and judge, I found it alarming to hear Barr comment on an ongoing investigation, led by John Durham, the U.S. attorney in Connecticut, into the origins of the Russia probe. And as someone who spent six years in the office Barr now occupies, it was infuriating to watch him publicly undermine an independent inspector general report — based on an exhaustive review of the FBI’s conduct — using partisan talking points bearing no resemblance to the facts his own department has uncovered.

When appropriate and justified, it is the attorney general’s duty to support Justice Department components, ensure their integrity and insulate them from political pressures. His or her ultimate loyalty is not to the president personally, nor even to the executive branch, but to the people — and the Constitution — of the United States.

Career public servants at every level of the Justice Department understand this — as do leaders such as FBI Director Christopher A. Wray and Inspector General Michael Horowitz. Their fidelity to the law and their conduct under pressure are a credit to them and the institutions they serve.

Others, like Durham, are being tested by this moment. I’ve been proud to know John for at least a decade, but I was troubled by his unusual statement disputing the inspector general’s findings. Good reputations are hard-won in the legal profession, but they are fragile; anyone in Durham’s shoes would do well to remember that, in dealing with this administration, many reputations have been irrevocably lost.

This is certainly true of Barr, who was until recently a widely respected lawyer. I and many other Justice veterans were hopeful that he would serve as a responsible steward of the department and a protector of the rule of law.

Holder closes with his statement that Barr is ‘unfit’. His case is totally based on policy differences and his claimed understanding of the nature of the job, which is odd considering Holder once called himself Obama’s “wingman” when he served as his attorney general and called Obama “my boy”: “I’m still the President’s wing-man, so I’m there with my boy.”

Virtually since the moment he took office, though, Barr’s words and actions have been fundamentally inconsistent with his duty to the Constitution. Which is why I now fear that his conduct — running political interference for an increasingly lawless president — will wreak lasting damage.

The American people deserve an attorney general who serves their interests, leads the Justice Department with integrity and can be entrusted to pursue the facts and the law, even — and especially — when they are politically inconvenient and inconsistent with the personal interests of the president who appointed him. William Barr has proved he is incapable of serving as such an attorney general. He is unfit to lead the Justice Department.

Barr, 69, is serving as attorney general a second time–the first during the presidency of George H.W. Bush. Barr is at the peak of his profession and is immune to Holder’s criticism.

Durham, on the other hand, while also Barr’s age, has been a career assistant U.S. attorney who was promoted by President Trump to U.S. Attorney for the District of Connecticut in 2017 after 35 years of service there. Holder’s message to Durham is clear, play ball or face ruin.

Durham’s statement that so “troubled” Holder:

“I have the utmost respect for the mission of the Office of Inspector General and the comprehensive work that went into the report prepared by Mr. Horowitz and his staff. However, our investigation is not limited to developing information from within component parts of the Justice Department. Our investigation has included developing information from other persons and entities, both in the U.S. and outside of the U.S. Based on the evidence collected to date, and while our investigation is ongoing, last month we advised the Inspector General that we do not agree with some of the report’s conclusions as to predication and how the FBI case was opened.”

Why would Holder find that statement so troubling that he would send a warning to Durham via the Washington Post? Holder knows very well what he is doing with his carefully worded threat and should know better than to warn or threaten a prosecutor–but the Deep State and its corrupt actors must be protected and “wingman” Holder has a job to do.

UPDATE: Rep. Dan Bishop (R-N.C.) understands, “Did Eric Holder obstruct justice in this threat to US Atty Durham?
“Good reputations are hard-won in the legal profession, but they are fragile; anyone in Durham’s shoes would do well to remember …”

CAP

Lying Swamp Creature Chris Wray Defends Spying on Trump: FBI Opens Investigations “Based on Law and Facts and Nothing Else” (VIDEO)

by Jim Hoft

The New York Times’ Headline upon the selection of Christopher Wray to run the FBI – “Trump’s Pick Is Said to be Low-Key and Principled”.  We suspected if the NY Times was praising Trump’s pick that he would be a Deep State crook and we were right!

We noted in December 2017 that Christopher Wray worked on the Enron team along side Mueller, Comey and Weissmann.

The gang that oversaw the indictment of Enron’s Chairman and CEO Kenneth Lay are all the members of today’s crooked and criminal FBI and DOJ team – James Comey, Robert Mueller, Andrew Weissmann and Christopher Wray 

Christopher Wray is a card carrying member of the Deep State.  He worked closely with three of the Deep State’s most notorious criminals – Mueller, Comey and Weissmann.

This gang attempted a coup of the US government.

On Monday, after the release of the DOJ IG report on the Obama FBI spying on the Trump campaign, FBI Director told NBC News that he did not think the Trump campaign was unfairly targeted by the FBI.

Chris Wray: “When the FBI opens an investigation it does so with proper predication, with proper authorization based on the law and the facts and nothing else.”

 

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑