liberal agenda

Impeachment Hearing: Class 101

Posted on by Helena

The President Trump impeachment hearings have descended into what would be viewed as a clown show at best. Key witnesses are coming forth having actually witnessed nothing, testimony is continually altered or changed, and new witnesses are called by the Democrats as they realize their old witnesses are collapsing:

Bill Taylor’s aide claims he overheard a conversation between Sondland and Trump in which he heard Trump ask about the ‘investigations’.   That would indicate the phone call was on speaker.   But it wasn’t – it was a cell phone call at a busy noisy restaurant on July 26th  in Kiev. The aid has not testified – his name is David Holmes and he is a counselor at the US embassy in Kiev.

In 2013, David Holmes was appointed by Obama as Director for Afghanistan.   In June 2013, he was present at a national security meeting held by Obama along with the newly appointed Avril Haines formerly serving as Director of the CIA before being appointed Obama’s deputy counsel.

According to Taylor, his aide told him that Sondland called Trump on his cell phone and Holmes claimed he could hear both sides of the conversation. Yet afterward, Holmes asked Sondland what President Trump ‘thought about Ukraine’. If he had heard both sides of the phone call, why would he ask this question?   Sondland replied with a shrug, Trump cares about the Biden investigation. That amounts to chit-chat.

Trump notified Congress that he would be holding up military aid to Ukraine in June, no one objected. Zelensky won the election on July 21st.  Holmes, Taylor and Sondland were all in Ukraine on July 26th.   Trump had no idea what kind of president Zelensky would make, Ukraine had been mired in corruption and war for 5 years, and his meeting with Zelensky would not take place until the end of September.

Nothing in this testimony says anything about Ukraine aid.

So far, we have an aid who claims he heard two sides of a cell phone conversation in which nothing is discussed except Sondland’s meetings. The aid then makes conclusions that Trump is bribing the newly elected Zelensky and runs home to tell his boss, Bill Taylor what he thinks he knows.   Bill Taylor then relays in hearings what his aid thinks he might have heard, but didn’t really, because Ukraine aid was never discussed, however Sondland was miffed because President Trump didn’t care about Ukraine but asked about the investigation that Biden had coerced the then prosecutor to drop or else Biden would withhold aid…

So it isn’t merely hearsay, Taylor’s testimony is now gossip down the line of gossip.

The Democrats defend the hearsay claiming Taylor was ‘under oath’ and therefore his hearsay isn’t real hearsay, it’s something else…

Media Liberals claim the evidence is damaging and proves Trump committed a sort of bribery scheme of ‘I will release the aid if you reopen the investigation against Hunter Biden.’   But President Trump never actually said that, all the evidence reveals is that some people who heard bits and pieces of a telephone conversation in which they were not privy made conclusions as to how they personally viewed said conversation despite hearing nothing to allude to aid.

The fact that the President of Ukraine, Zelensky, and his staff find the entire frame of the conversation as damning preposterous at best, and comedic at worst, invites no credibility.   Why?

Are the democrats saying that testimony by the Ukrainian president is not worthy of acceptance? Are they claiming the Ukraine president is lying?   Because that would indicate that they feel the Ukraine president is corrupt… And if the Ukraine president is corrupt, then deferring aide to Ukraine would be completely within President Trump’s authority.

Democrats site that ‘all the witnesses are corroborating each other’ – yet all the witnesses give depositions behind closed doors, we have no idea what coercion might be relayed.
So far, most of the testimony is supposition and has taken a simple remark made by Sondland and embellished it with theories and innuendo.   The fact that Trump withheld the aid a full month before the telephone conversation took place, before Zelensky was elected, refutes nearly every statement.   The fact that Zelensky won the election based on his promise to eradicate all corruption is also telling knowing that Biden had quashed the initial investigation into Burisma by threatening to withhold aid back in 2016. In essence it is Biden who should have been impeached as VP under Obama given his public admission that is widely available.

The impeachment hearing is marked with legal issues, corruption, altered words, and the absolute heinous desire to derail President Trump because the 2020 election is a Democrat failure.

GerryMandering – Coming To A State Near You! The Obama /Holder Plan To Socialize The US

Posted on by Helena

Of the 435 seats in the House of Representatives, the Democrats and Socialists sit in 235 of them.   Of the 100 seats in the Senate, Democrats and Socialists sit in 49 of them.   In 2020, all 435 House seats are up for re-election.   And their accomplishments will be up for scrutiny. This is why Pelosi needs them to back off Impeachment, because after two years in office they have nothing to show worthy of their wage. As such they risk giving away the House if they don’t get out of their respective seats and actually work.

For some who have been holding their chair for 30+ years, they have already milked the political empire and reaped the reward of elite status and wealth.   Doing anything of consequence is no longer important. Too often candidates run unchallenged.   Kamala Harris was re-elected because no one ran against her.   Ocasio ran in a District that she doesn’t live in.   Bezo lost and decided that was good on the resume to then run for President.   I don’t think the Democrats have a clue what is important, what people want, or what it means to be honest and genuine.   And perhaps like the Trump win in 2016, those lacking attributes will contribute to their demise and fall.

Joe Scarborough, a career politician who worked in the world of law for exactly two years, had one case that he backed out of – is telling Trump he doesn’t know how to negotiate.   In politics, that would mean Trump doesn’t know how to accept bribes and follow the rules of order established by The Swamp.

It is always interesting to hear Hollywooders and career politicians lecture business ethics and business acumen when they have never worked for a living.   Joe Scarborough makes $6 million per year to sit on a stage set and spew hate rants.   His wife makes $2 million to do the same…   Why aren’t they complaining about gender equality in pay?

The Power of Money has created a dervish Swamp of its own. Desperate to hear and see themselves on television, these money idol worshipers seem to think they are intellectuals.    Journalists with degree’s in art, Hollywooders with no degree at all, brazenly exalt their incompetence and sore lack of knowledge while applauding each other.

But just as Hollywood has felt a belt tightening given their inability to simply remain celluloid heroes, the House and Senate re-elections will undoubtedly focus on lacking accomplishments and wasted time.

If we take a look at the accomplishments of most politicians, the stark reality is that they have done absolutely nothing their entire tenure.   Even Chuck Schumer is a case in point.   While he makes headlines as Pelosi’s sidekick, his political career has been entirely about – getting re-elected. He got his foothold into politics by running in a NY District that was predominantly black and Hispanic – roughly 60%.   With one exception, it has been a Democratic stronghold since 1943.   People vote by party, instead of by person, and that is how Schumer began his political career, and how he has jumped Districts to keep his political career. The same strategy was used by Ocasio-Cortez who ran in a predominantly poor, black/Hispanic District that always voted Democrat despite continuing the level of poverty for decades.

Maxine Waters first ran in California’s 29th District that was nearly 70% Hispanic and had voted Democrat since 1957. After redistricting, she was assigned to California’s 35th which was over 70% Hispanic. Out of a population of roughly 710,000, voter turnout in 2014 was 62,000, and in 2018 it was 149,000 representing a rate of 8.7% and 21% respectively.   Again, roughly the same as Ocasio.

Nancy Pelosi was shoed into two Democrat Districts with voter turnout ranging in the low to mid 20th percentile. She left after redistricting in 2011 caused a hard conservative lean and was ‘redistricted’ to a Democrat stable once again where voter turnout was roughly 47% and 70% Democrat.

In other words, Democrats move to where they will have no contest.

ThinkProgress and The Brennan Institute, both highly controversial Liberal organizations with Deep Soros Pockets, are claiming that Republicans are resorting to Gerrymandering by blocking funds for their redistricting plans in Michigan. A liberal NGO, Voters Not Politicians, managed to put an initiative on the 2018 ballot that altered the Michigan Constitution whereby redistricting would be done by an “Independent council” instead of by politicians.   That Independent Council is essentially the Obama/Holder redistricting plan set in motion after Hillary’s loss. It allows Obama/Holder and their protogee’s to create gerrymandering lines in advance of the 2020 election:

“The National Democratic Redistricting Committee is the centralized hub for executing a comprehensive redistricting strategy that shifts the redistricting power, creating fair districts where Democrats can compete.”

“In the past few years, courts have overturned gerrymandered maps in Virginia, North Carolina, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Texas.”

Coming to a State near you –