Published on Mar 14, 2019
Just to get through it, we trimmed his speech down (a lot) and put the 1812 overture finale behind it.

Published on Mar 14, 2019


The following scientific taxonomy simply identifies those afflicted with Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS). Congress is currently investing in progressive research into a cure known as impeachment, but no permanent remedies are expected to be available for 18 months, at least.
TDS sufferers are not Democrat supporters in temporary political opposition, they are the Resistance.


Trump is not going to be beaten in an election. He is going to be impeached. He is going to be spending his last years in a jumpsuit as orange as his face. His heart will explode.

The sufferer may be a multi-millionaire celebrity with views endorsed by nearly all of the media establishment. But they are in anguish. Do not be afraid to tell a TDS sufferer that they are one – they will readily agree with you, and blame President Donald Trump for a wide range of symptoms.

If not at a personal disadvantage, the sufferer may appropriate pain of other victim groups.

Trump is #notmypresident and must not be “normalized.” Reality: Donald Trump has been the US president since January 2017, for over two years.

There is still good in Darth Vader, but Donald Trump has no redeeming qualities. On the other hand, anyone who has ever opposed him – from Stormy Daniels to John McCain – is a hero.


Is this a routine government policy I disagree with, or IS IT THE WORST THING EVER?

This.

Bonus fact: Janna DeVylder did not live in the United States at the time of the 2016 election. Expats often suffer the wildest cases of TDS.
Mostly of leaving the country. Can be safely ignored.
Wikileaks, Internet Research Agency, Cambridge Analytica, tax returns, Michael Flynn, Michael Cohen, Michael Avenatti, Stormy Daniels, Nastya Rybka, Oleg Deripaska, Paul Manafort’s ostrich jacket, Ivanka Trump spa in Moscow, the woman who owned the spa that Robert Kraft went to, who sold it six years ago, and was then photographed with Trump in 2019. Don’t you see how the puzzle fits?

Michael Cohen was a no-good liar for Trump, but against Trump he never lies. Insinuation, omission, unproven claims and outright fabrications, are ‘fake news’, unless they are about Trump, in which case they serve a purpose. Uncontrolled immigration is bad, but if Trump wants to stop it, let them all in. Peace talks with nuclear rogue states are good, but if Trump is leading them, they are worse than bomb tests.

The patient believes that the economy will collapse, lynchings will return, World War III will start, the Pope’s robes will alight with blinding fire. In fact, all these things might already be happening (see: Impaired judgement).


By John Nolte
Late last month, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez declared herself “the boss” — and Thursday’s disgraceful House vote condemning All the Hates proved that sentiment 100 percent true.
Don’t be fooled by Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MD); she is not “stepping on rakes” or “accidentally” revealing her antisemitism. This is a coordinated strategy on the part of her and her allies to legitimize antisemitism, to normalize bigoted stereotypes about money-grubbing and dual loyalties that go above and beyond honest criticism of Israel.
That’s the play here, that is what is at stake, and because she’s lost control of the House and her caucus to the Ocasio-Crazies, Pelosi is helpless to stop it.
In fact, Pelosi has become Ocasio-Crazy’s puppet, her mouthpiece… “I do not believe she understood the full weight of the words,” Pelosi told reporters Thursday to explain why she does not believe Omar should apologize or lose her consequential seat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
“I feel confident that her words were not based on any antisemitic attitude. But that she didn’t have a full appreciation of how they landed on other people where these words have a history and a cultural impact that might have been unknown to her,” the ventriloquist dummy added without blinking.
This week marked the third time in two months Omar went there, went to a place we have not seen a mainstream figure go since Father Coughlin in the 1930s. And with Ocasio-Crazy out there launching a ridiculous (and condescending) defense of Omar (it’s a learning process) and refusing to back a House resolution that condemns antisemitism alone (think about that), Pelosi had no choice but to back down, to come up with this utterly meaningless All the Hates resolution that Omar was perfectly comfortable voting for.
And why wouldn’t she vote yea? The resolution was not only a triumph for Omar and her wild-eyed ilk over Pelosi, it proved her strategy is working — that you can now hurl these bigoted smears without fear of condemnation.
This is how much of a shell Pelosi is now: she no longer has the influence to convince her caucus to support a standalone resolution against antisemitism; she no longer has the authority to stop Omar from her antisemitic quest to move the Overton window, she is powerless against Omar’s launching of one rhetorical fire bomb after another directly into the middle of Pelosi’s agenda for the 116th Congress.
And let’s be honest, going back to its Ku Klux Klan and Jim Crow days, the Democrat Party has always been a hotbed of antisemitism — a party that has tolerated and even feted Louis Farrakhan for decades, that embraces Rev. Al Sharpton, a Party that seems to have grown tired of having to hide its antisemitism and just wants to be free.
By Gregg Re, Catherine Herridge
The sources said the sessions covered a slew of topics addressed during the public hearing before the oversight committee — including the National Enquirer’s “Catch and Kill” policy, American Media CEO David Pecker and the alleged undervaluing of President Trump’s assets.
COHEN DOCS UNDERCUT CLAIMS TRUMP LAWYERS MADE EDITS TO ALTER CRUCIAL TIMELINE
But, Republicans have raised concerns with the sessions, with Ohio Rep. Mike Turner sending a letter to Cohen’s team on Wednesday demanding answers.
Turner specifically asked for confirmation of Cohen’s contacts, if any, “with Democratic Members or Democratic staff of SSCI [Senate Select Committee on Intelligence], COR [House Committee on Oversight and Reform], or HPSCI [House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence] prior to his appearances before House and Senate committees last week” — as well as the lengths of such contacts, their locations and who exactly was involved.
“These questions are important for the public to understand whether or not they were watching witness testimony, a public hearing, or well-rehearsed theater,” he wrote.
During last month’s seven-hour public hearing before the House Oversight Committee, Cohen hesitantly acknowledged, under questioning from Ohio GOP Rep. Jim Jordan, that he had spoken with Schiff “about topics that were going to be raised at the upcoming hearing.”
But, he did not elaborate on the discussions, which Fox News is told extended significantly longer than the seven hours that the public hearing itself lasted.
One by one, during the dramatic hearing, Cohen fielded questions on precisely the same topics that the sources told Fox News he discussed with Schiff’s staff during the sit-downs in New York.
For example, in response to questioning from Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., Cohen discussed the purported practice of paying for the rights to news stories harmful to Trump, only to bury them.
“I was involved in several of these catch-and-kill episodes,” Cohen told Maloney, “but these catch-and-kill scenarios existed between David Pecker and Mr. Trump long before I started working in 2007.”
Cohen went on to testify that Pecker, whose company publishes the National Enquirer, had paid $30,000 to a former Trump World Tower doorman who alleged he had information about a supposed love child fathered by Trump. The former Trump fixer asserted that Trump was concerned also about the “treasure trove of documents” Pecker had that could implicate him.
Further, Cohen was asked by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., “To your knowledge, did the president ever provide inflated assets to an insurance company?”
Cohen replied: “Yes.”
COHEN SUES TRUMP ORGANIZATION FOR MILLIONS IN LEGAL FEES
“Who else knows that the president did this?” Ocasio-Cortez pressed.
“Allen Weisselberg, Ron Lieberman and Matthew Calamari,” Cohen said, referring to the Trump Organization’s chief financial officer and other key Trump associates. “You deflate the value of the asset and then you put in a request to the tax department for a deduction.”
Cohen also brought documents that he claimed proved Trump “inflated” his assets in order to obtain loans from Deutsche Bank.

Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s former personal lawyer, testified last month before the House Oversight Committee on Capitol Hill. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)
Asked about the revelations by email, a House Intelligence Committee spokesman defended the Schiff staff’s pre-hearing discussions with Cohen.
“We are running a professional investigation in search of the facts, and we welcome the opportunity to meet with potential witnesses in advance of any testimony to determine relevant topics to cover in order to make productive use of their time before the Committee,” spokesman Patrick Boland told Fox News.
“Despite this professed outrage by Republicans, it’s completely appropriate to conduct proffer sessions and allow witnesses to review their prior testimony before the Committee interviews them — such sessions are a routine part of every serious investigation around the country, including congressional investigations.”
Schiff was asked about the frequency of his contacts with Cohen on CBS News’ “Face the Nation” this weekend, and gave the number “seven” — but Schiff did not distinguish between the number of his own contacts with Cohen and the committee staff’s interactions with him.
Schiff asserted, “The extent of my contact was just inviting him to testify and also trying to allay his concerns about the president’s threats against him and his family … but our staff certainly sat down to interview him, and that’s what you do in any credible investigation.”
A source close to Schiff claimed some details about the staff meetings were “not accurate” but did not point to specifics.
On Cohen, a source familiar with his closed-door testimony before the House Intelligence Committee would not comment directly on the number and substance of the meetings between Cohen and the Schiff staff, but said more broadly that Schiff “pledged to release the full transcript of Mr. Cohen’s eight hour testimony, at which point Mr. Cohen will be vindicated and others will be implicated.”

By Hank Berrien
Tlaib blustered, “We saw record turnout in an election year, where people wanted to elect a jury that would begin the impeachment proceedings to Donald Trump. We want to work on these economic justice issues, racial justice issues and everything. But guess what? There is a wall there, and a constitutional crisis that is not going to [let us] do our jobs as American Congress members to push a lot of these agendas forward,” according to The Hill.
Bragging about the new Democratic members of Congress, Tlaib added, “This is the largest class since Watergate. This is a class — a diverse class — that comes … with a sense of urgency to act. To act to hold corporations accountable, to act in holding President Trump accountable, to act to really try to see real reforms, even within our congressional process. This is an emergency for many of us.”
On the night after she joined the House of Representatives, Tlaib cried, “People love you and you win. And when your son looks at you and says, ‘Momma, look you won. Bullies don’t win.’ And I said, ‘Baby, they don’t, because we’re gonna go in there and we’re gonna impeach the mother***er.’”
President Donald Trump is a direct and serious threat to our country. On an almost daily basis, he attacks our Constitution, our democracy, the rule of law and the people who are in this country. His conduct has created a constitutional crisis that we must confront now …
We already have overwhelming evidence that the president has committed impeachable offenses, including, just to name a few: obstructing justice; violating the emoluments clause; abusing the pardon power; directing or seeking to direct law enforcement to prosecute political adversaries for improper purposes; advocating illegal violence and undermining equal protection of the laws; ordering the cruel and unconstitutional imprisonment of children and their families at the southern border; and conspiring to illegally influence the 2016 election through a series of hush money payments …
We are also now hearing the dangerous claim that initiating impeachment proceedings against this president is politically unwise and that, instead, the focus should now shift to holding the president accountable via the 2020 election. Such a claim places partisan gamesmanship over our country and our most vulnerable at this perilous moment in our nation’s history. Members of Congress have a sworn duty to preserve our Constitution. Leaving a lawless president in office for political points would be abandoning that duty …
This is not just about Donald Trump. This is about all of us. What should we be as a nation? Who should we be as a people? In the face of this constitutional crisis, we must rise. We must rise to defend our Constitution, to defend our democracy, and to defend that bedrock principle that no one is above the law, not even the President of the United States. Each passing day brings more pain for the people most directly hurt by this president, and these are days we simply cannot get back. The time for impeachment proceedings is now.
Tlaib is not the first House Democrat to pursue impeaching Trump. Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) has introduced articles of impeachment; Rep. Al Green (D-TX) has promised to reintroduce a motion to impeach the president.
READ MORE: DONALD TRUMP RASHIDA TLAIB
By Guy Benson

(2) The Senate panel’s parallel probe has been much more professionally handled, with sober bipartisan leadership, but its resources and powers are incomplete, so its ‘no collusion‘ findings cannot be considered conclusive. (3) What really matters are the findings of Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his team. Mueller is so important, in fact, that there has been constant hand-wringing about his investigation being canceled or disrupted by Trump. But now that it’s reportedly almost Mueller Time, there appears to be a concerted effort in anti-Trump circles to redefine the battlefield. No matter what Mueller’s verdict may be on Russian ‘collusion,’ we’re increasingly told, Trump is already guilty:

That first tweet is a CNN analyst preparing his audience for a potential letdown, preemptively pivoting to focusing on already-known facts if Mueller doesn’t drop new bombshells. The second is the Senate Intelligence Committee’s ranking member (who is slowly backing away from his call for his state’s governor to resign) not exactly contradicting Chairman Burr, but basically arguing, “what we already know is bad enough.” Perhaps most importantly, the new leader of the House committee that would instigate the impeachment process against the president went on television over the weekend and declared that he’s seen enough to conclude that its “very clear” the president has committed an impeachable crime:
Amid last week’s Michael Cohen hearings, a number of liberals, journalists, and Republicans observed that the proceedings felt like the first step toward removing Trump from office. Byron York argues that Democrats have now officially tipped their hand:
Think what you will about the reasons — calling an investigation a “witch hunt” is obstruction of justice? — but Nadler sounded less like a man weighing the evidence than a man who has has made up his mind.Given that, Nadler’s ABC interview led to a question: President Nixon was threatened with impeachment for obstruction of justice. President Clinton was impeached for obstruction of justice. Why is Nadler, who heads the committee in the House that originates articles of impeachment, not moving forward with impeaching President Trump right now? … Nadler’s talk with ABC was the clearest indication yet that Democrats have decided to impeach Trump and are now simply doing the legwork involved in making that happen. And that means the debate among House Democrats will be a tactical one — what is the best time and way to go forward — rather than a more fundamental discussion of whether the president should be impeached…
Other House Democrats are sending similar messages. “There is abundant evidence of collusion,” House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said on CBS Sunday…So now the Democratic plan is coming into sharper relief. The impeachment decision has been made. Various committee chairs are moving forward in gathering and organizing the formal justification for removing the president. The timing decision is still up in the air, as is an overarching communications plan — selling impeachment to the American public, or more specifically those Americans who don’t already support impeachment…whatever the stated rationale, impeachment is on.
The goalposts are moving before our very eyes. But Allahpundit seems to agree that the Axios-floated grand strategy from House Democrats is not to pull the trigger on the I-word over the next year-plus, but rather to execute a slow-bleed of politically-damaging pain over that time span. The idea would be to cripple and overwhelm Trump’s presidency all the way up to election day, then let the voters oust him from office. “The smart play is to do what they’re doing, launching an open-ended investigation that will dig up plenty of dirt on Trump and grind on to Election Day next year,” he writes. “Instead of passing articles of impeachment and seeing them die in the Senate, they’re probably going to produce a Democratic counterpart to the Mueller report, laying out everything they find in gory detail and publishing it next summer so that the Democratic nominee and the media have a treasure trove of oppo to use against Trump.” If I were a betting man, that would be my wager, too. I’ll leave you with Trump-skeptical conservative writer David French attacking the Steele Dossier (the credibility of which was further eroded by Cohen’s testimony):
Gowdy did, in fact, make this point, and Russia’s 2016 electoral interference undoubtedly deserved very serious scrutiny. But a shady and unverified Clinton/DNC oppo research scheme serving as a primary driver of key elements of the investigation is a very bad look — and it almost certainly fed a pernicious spiral of mutual mistrust between Trumpworld and the DOJ that has convinced people on each side that the other is dangerous and must be stopped. The toxicity in American politics right now is palpable and worrisome. By the way, not all Democrats agree that Nadler’s sprawling, open-ended investigation is a smart move:

By Ian Hanchett
Murphy said, “[T]here are so many different ways that you can check the president. The free press checks the president, the judiciary checks him, and Congress checks him. But you are also right that the ultimate check is impeachment. And what we know is that the president’s behavior has already crossed the threshold of what was brought for impeachment before the House in the Nixon administration and the Clinton administration. In fact, he crossed those thresholds in the first weeks or months of office. And so, that is another means, if these other means fail, to control this president.”

FEBRUARY 27, 2019
“I believe that impeachment is inevitable. It also is a terrifying notion,” Omar tweeted Wednesday. “Nations struggle any time they overthrow a dictator, and Trump really has the markings of a dictator.”

Rather than offer evidence of Trump behaving like a “dictator,” Omar instead linked to a Rolling Stone fluff piece about herself.
Omar’s silence around Maduro’s recent mass killings of anti-socialist protesters even drew the attention of leftist outlet The Washington Post:
“The spread of death-squad tactics has been one of the most stomach-churning aspects of this year’s political crisis — with mass fear spreading through poorer areas and just a handful of victims daring to come forward and tell their stories on the record,” wrote Francisco Toro earlier this month.

“And that rather than standing up to Maduro’s death squads, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) had used an exchange with the Trump administration’s envoy to pressure the United States to do nothing at all to rein them in.”
Furthermore, Omar embarrassed herself by sniping at the U.S. envoy to Venezuela over war crimes that took place decades ago, Toro said.
“In a grotesque display of contempt for the Venezuelan mothers grieving for their children the Maduro regime has murdered in recent weeks, Omar chose to use her stage to attack the U.S. envoy, Elliott Abrams, for decades-old abuses in Central America.”
“Showcasing astonishing insensitivity to the victims of a human rights catastrophe that is still ongoing today, she disgraced her perch in Congress and scored an invaluable propaganda victory to the regime sponsoring the exact type of human rights abuses she imagines herself to be opposing,” he added.
Of course, despite the fact Trump is obviously not a dictator due to America’s system of checks and balances, it won’t stop Omar from trying to score political points while ignoring actual atrocities in South America.

By Pam Key
Green said, “And still I rise. And I rise today with love of country in my heart and a belief that the record has to be set straight. The record has to always reflect the truth, and there is a truth that is being obscured. I want to set the record straight because there seems to be a belief that if you have committed acts of bigotry, if you have been a racist, if you have been engaged in homophobia, xenophobia, Islamophobia, if you do one thing, somehow that thing will eradicate and eliminate all of the bigotry that you have perpetrated. I rise to correct the record because I want the record to show that at least one person came to the floor of this Congress and made it clear that, yes, unemployment may be low for African-Americans, yes, it may be low, but it’s still twice that of Anglo-Americans, generally speaking. Yes, you may have signed a bill to deal with some aspects of criminal justice in a just way, and that’s appreciated. But there’s still more work to be done. But notwithstanding the fact there’s more work to be done, it’s still appreciated. But the record has to be set straight. And here is what the record should show; that does not eliminate the bigotry emanating from presidency. Eliminating bigotry does not occur because you signed one bill. It does not occur because unemployment is low. It does you have to do more than simply sign a bill.”
He continued, “And I am not saying to you than an apology is in order. I tell people, tell the truth, just tell the truth. Say I was wrong when I instituted a policy that separated babies from their mothers. That emanates the type of bigotry we don’t condone in this country. Say I was wrong when I said there was good people among those who were the racists, the bigots, the xenophobes and homophobes in Charlottesville. Say I was wrong when you don’t have to be so kind when you are part of the constabulary, you are part of the policing force in this country. Just say you were wrong if you want to atone. Signing bills won’t do it. Going to church won’t do it. Asking forgiveness will cause you to be forgiven, and I will forgive you, but that doesn’t mean you will no longer be sanctioned for your bigotry. I want to thank those who have stood and made their points clear as it relates to bigotry. I’m listening to these morning programs now. They’re all talking about bigotry emanating from the presidency, not necessarily in those words. They’re talking about the racism that the President perpetrates. I appreciate what they are saying. But we got to do more than talk about it. We cannot allow a president to remain in office who has engaged in this kind of bigoted conduct.”
He added, “It is time for us to take a stand here on the floor of the House of Representatives. There were no fine people in Charlottesville. You ought not separate babies from their mothers. You ought not have policies that would condone bigotry and encourage others to engage in it. I believe that we have a duty to take a vote. And at some point in the near future we will take another vote, notwithstanding the Mueller report. I yield back the balance of my time.”