This partisan impeachment process did not start in September with the announcement of a whistleblower report being filed, it began January 20th, 2017 when President Trump first took office. Since then the American people have seen one investigation after another all without substantial or compelling merit.
Investigations began with the ongoing fight to release the president’s tax returns, even going as far as forcing the Supreme Court to rule on whether the House may subpoena the documents. The Court temporarily voided a 2nd Circuit Court ruling which ordered the Treasury Department to turn over his financial documents. Though there remains literally no crime which they are accusing Trump of; Democrats simply want to investigate them for the hell of it.
While that was happening, the FBI began investigating whether Michael Flynn, former National Security Adviser, had lied about speaking with Russians during the presidential transition. A massive nothing burger. He was slated to take the position in a matter of weeks when the conversations occurred. Absolutely nothing comes from this.
Then was the Russian influence in the 2016 election, which Comey testified did not involve President Trump during the initial stages. Though for some odd reason Comey refused to correct the record when countless media outlets reported falsely on this case.
That investigation morphed into a giant Russia probe headed by special counsel Robert Mueller. Again, zero evidence of Russian collusion with Trump, and non-prosecutable evidence of obstruction of justice. Now, many critics say Mueller would have recommended charges if Trump were not president, but that ignores several key precedents. First, Mueller, even if he did not recommend charges, could have easily stated he thought the actions were criminal or violated the law. He didn’t. Mueller’s report merely outlined cased of Trump doing questionable things without drawing any conclusions. Second, the Starr Report which lead to Bill Clinton’s impeachment bluntly stated he broke the law.
Whelp, that all wrapped up. Now we are on to the next controversy: Ukraine. All the while, Democratic leaders like Adam Schiff, who had back channel contact with the alleged whistleblower – a Biden operator who never heard the scandalous phone call, and Nancy Pelosi gaslit the media and public with claims of mysteriously evil dealing and character attacks against President Trump.
Out of the 14 witnesses called to the stand, only one had ever spoken personally to the president. Republican congressmen were promised the right to call up to three witnesses of their choosing, yet that has not come to fruition, and we still have not heard from the whistleblower, Hunter Biden, or anyone involved with Trump’s decision-making process. Nonetheless, Pelosi is still marching on trying to rush through an impeachment vote without all the facts coming in.
Rep. Schiff came out an said they will not wait for all the facts to come out from actually relevant witnesses . Instead, the House judiciary committee would rather call up hand selected and partisan law professors to aid in their confirmation bias. These opinionated lawyers spent the better part of four hours blurting out editorials of their interpretation of the events which had taken place. They know no more than the public, yet they’re seen at the final say on constitutionality on an overwhelmingly partisan level.
With a public transcript of the controversial call in question, there is absolutely no reason for us to hear from third- and fourth-hand accounts of the incidents from people who knew someone who knew someone who overheard one side of a phone call. And why do we need to listen to three leftist professor lecture us on something they know no more about than us? Unapologetic partisanship.
“Sadly, but with confidence and humility, with allegiance to our Founders, and our heart full of love for America, today I am asking our chairmen to proceed with the articles of impeachment,” Pelosi told reporters yesterday. Ignoring the complete load of nonsense that statement was, it’s clear she’s jumping for joy behind her poker face. Democrats have routinely proposed one unconstitutional policy after another – gun bans, centralization of healthcare, wealth taxes, micromanaging the plenary powers of the president, etc.
This brings us to the actual event; as Speaker Pelosi was walking away from a press conference where she commanded Democrats to write up articles of impeachment, making Trump the likely 3rd president to be impeached, reporter James Rosen asked the Speaker, “do you hate the president?”
Pelosi, already having left the podium shot back with anger! “Don’t accuse me,” she told Rosen. Still off stage, Pelosi goes into a heated rant virtue signaling her Catholic upbringing and taking offense to a valid question.
Speaker Pelosi then takes the time to call the president a “coward” for not banning guns, “cruel” for not granting illegal aliens the right to stay in the United State – he actually offered to give amnesty to over a million illegal aliens in exchange for border wall funding – and said he was in denial for not radically shifting the economy over climate change. Then went on to say she doesn’t hate him. Weird way of defending yourself.
“This is about the Constitution of the United States and the facts that lead to the president’s violation of his oath of office,” the Speaker added. “As a Catholic, I resent your using the word ‘hate’ in a sentence that addresses me. I don’t hate anyone.” Though she may be Catholic in name, her on-demand abortion advocacy and belief in fluidity of gender is far from a traditional catholic position. Not many religious scholars are willing to argue killing babies is a moral deed. Her constitutional record as well, applying standards of impeachment inconsistently, lends even less credibility to her claim.
When President Obama asked the Russian ambassador if he could tell Putin to go easy on the US so that Obama would have more flexibility after the election, there were no cries of a Quid-Pro-Quo.
“I was raised in a way that is a heart full of love, and always pray for the president,” she continued. “And I still pray for the president. I pray for the president all the time. So don’t mess with me when it comes to words like that.”
Speaker Pelosi’s outbursts against journalists, and even occasionally against the president would not have been tolerated by the media if she had an [R] next to her name. Imagine Mitch McConnell or Paul Ryan doing the same to a CNN reporter, or President Obama during his tenure. A photo of Pelosi jolting up during a Syria meeting at the White House and pointing her fingers at the president went viral not too long ago being labeled ‘brave’ by the press.
The Trump campaign responded to Speaker Pelosi’s rant by calling her “unhinged.”
The hypocrisy is real. During the impeachment of Bill Clinton, of which had actual criminal acts, Nancy Pelosi said in December of 1998, “today the Republican majority is not judging the president with fairness but impeaching him with a vengeance. In the investigation of the president, fundamental principles which Americans hold dear – fairness, privacy, checks and balances – have been seriously violated, and why? Because we are here today because the Republicans in the House are paralyzed with hatred of President Clinton. … Until the Republicans free themselves of that hatred, our country will suffer.”
She outright makes the same claim which worked herself into a yelling fit – saying Republicans only pursued impeachment because they hated President Clinton. The Speaker’s attempted grand standing over her supposed moral high grounds on the basis of loving the constitution and “praying” for Trump falls on deaf ears.