Thursday, November 28, 2019
Wednesday, November 27, 2019
Congress Isn’t Working this Week, but President Trump Is
Congress broke for the Thanksgiving holiday late last week. Unfortunately, thanks to the far left’s recent impeachment stunt, Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s House has been effectively shut down for weeks.
That isn’t stopping President Donald J. Trump from working hard for the American people, though.
“Donald Trump signed the first animal cruelty bill of his presidency on Monday, outlawing narrow types of egregious violence usually committed for the purpose of videotaping them. The Senate unanimously passed the Preventing Animal Cruelty and Torture Act this month,” David Martosko reports for the Daily Mail.
Click here to continue reading.
|
|
|
|
|
Tuesday, November 26, 2019
Monday, November 25, 2019
Impeachment Is Destroying Democrats
“The past two weeks, the nation was subjected to partisan impeachment hearings orchestrated by House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA). The process has been unfair to not only House Republicans but also to the target of their investigation, President Trump,” Jeff Crouere writes in Townhall.
“On Thursday night, Democratic staffers enjoyed cocktails on Capitol Hill to celebrate the end of a week of televised impeachment hearings. The partygoers believed the hearings were a smashing success on the road to the impeachment of the President. Instead, the evidence shows that Democrats should be worried, not celebrating. The American people are tiring of the Democratic Party’s political antics.”
Click here to read more.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Friday, November 22, 2019
FIVE STORIES PRESIDENT TRUMP DOESN'T WANT YOU TO MISS
|
Thursday, November 21, 2019
When the Villain is Obama, Not Trump, News Suddenly Becomes Not Worth Reporting
“So the United States has ‘the world’s highest rate of children in detention.’ Is this worth reporting? Maybe, maybe not. Nevertheless, Agence France-Presse, or AFP, and Reuters did report it, attributing the information to a ‘United Nations study’ on migrant children detained at the US-Mexico border,” Kyle Smith writes for the New York Post.
“Then the two agencies retracted the story.” Why? “Sheepishly, the two news organizations explained that, you see, the UN data was from 2015.”
Why does that matter? “We all know who the president was in 2015,” Smith writes. Think about that: “The story was removed. Not updated or corrected, removed.”
How else does the media manipulate the news to their liking? Smith exposes all the tricks.
Click here to read more.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wednesday, November 20, 2019
Why Dems are so Worried After Latest Round of Impeachment Hearings
“With signs that Americans are tuning out the impeachment hearings, the clock is ticking on Democrats’ chance to make their case. Pelosi is clearly worried, telling fellow Dems it’s a ‘weak response’ to ‘let the election decide’ whether President Trump should be removed,” Michael Goodwin writes in the New York Post.
The letter seemed strange on Monday when Pelosi sent it to her colleagues, the editors write, “but Tuesday’s hearing more than justified her fear and desperation.”
Click here to read more.
|
|
|
|
|
3 must-see moments from Impeachment, Day 1,033
The Washington Swamp often likes to think they alone run our country, with input from voters serving, at most, as a pesky inconvenience. That’s why House Democrats and their “star witnesses” keep claiming, day after day, that President Donald J. Trump is somehow at odds with America’s “stated foreign policy.” By America’s, they mean their own.
Let’s be clear: The President, duly elected by the American people, is the one who sets the foreign policy of the United States. Career bureaucrats and political appointees, while entitled to their own opinions, do not. That’s how constitutional democracies work.
Yet during hours and hours of hearings that have effectively shut down Congress this month, Americans are being treated to just that: opinions. Every single time House Republicans ask the witnesses for any actual evidence of crimes or impeachable offenses committed by the President, none is offered. That’s because those crimes don’t exist.
Today’s hearing followed the same script. Alexander Vindman—who testified for hours on national TV—has never met the President, said that he has no way of knowing what the President was thinking on Ukraine, and admitted that his testimony was based on nothing more than his own personal opinions and feelings.
America learned nothing new. A few witnesses, Vindman included, actually confirmed the accuracy of the White House call transcript between President Trump and President Zelensky. Vindman even acknowledged the corruption surrounding Burisma and that Hunter Biden didn’t appear qualified to serve on the company’s board, leaving the door open for a potential conflict of interest.
Most important for Americans outside the Beltway Swamp, it’s been more than 1,000 days of Democrats’ nonstop impeachment and investigations. Every hour wasted staging TV infomercials for the left is another hour that Congress isn’t passing a budget, isn’t approving USMCA to fix NAFTA for American workers, isn’t addressing our broken immigration system, isn’t working to lower medicine prices, and isn’t working for you.
With that in mind, here are 3 moments that tell you everything you need to know:
Tuesday, November 19, 2019
New Trump-Zelensky Transcript Undercuts Dems' Main Impeachment Claim on White House Visit
President Donald Trump has outmaneuvered impeachment-obsessed Democrats yet again.
Friday morning the White House released a formerly eyes only memo record — for all intents and purposes a transcript — of the first telephone call between Trump and then newly-elected Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky, dated April 21, 2019.
The transcript kneecaps one of the Democrats’ main impeachment claims, namely that part of the alleged Trump quid pro quo (or bribery as Democrats now call it after having focus-grouped the term) was the arrangement of a Zelensky visit to the White House.
The other piece of the alleged quid pro quo was the delivery of security aid to Ukraine (which the U.S. provided before Ukraine diplomats ever knew it was in question) in exchange for investigations of alleged Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election and alleged improprieties committed by Joe Biden’s son and potentially Biden himself.
The transcript, however, completely undercuts the White House visit claim in the quid pro quo accusation.
Do you think the investigation is only helping Trump's chances of re-election?
99% (3863 Votes)
1% (44 Votes)
The new transcript of the older call records Trump saying to Zelensky, “When you’re settled in and ready, I’d like to invite you to the White House. We’ll have a lot of things to talk about, but we’re with you all the way.”
Further driving the nail into the coffin is Zelensky’s response: “Well, thank you for the invitation. We accept the invitation and look forward to the visit. Thank you again. The whole team and I are looking forward to the visit.”
Clearly, as far as Zelensky knew, the invitation for a White House visit had been extended and he had accepted it.
Regardless of State Department claims that the White House set pre-conditions on the meeting, the President of the United States had personally invited Zelensky.
Those claims take us to another point: Where were those pre-conditions coming from? Democrats point to text messages like this, reported in The Washington Post, from U.S. envoy to Ukraine Kurt Volker to Zelesnky aid Andrey Yermack: “heard from White House — assuming President Z convinces trump he will investigate / ‘get to the bottom of what happened’ in 2016, we will nail down date for visit to Washington.”
That’s all well and good as far as it goes, but it doesn’t go far. That text was sent on July 25, hours before the Trump-Zelensky call. Volker might have been saying one thing to Zelensky’s aid, but Trump said something very different to Zelesnky according to the July 25 transcript: “Whenever you would like to come to the White House, feel free to call. Give us a date and we’ll work that out. I look forward to seeing you.”
Again, Zelensky responded as if there were no pre-conditions (even after the Volker texts): “Thank you very much. I would be very happy to come and would be happy to meet with you personally and get to know you better. I am looking forward to our meeting…”
That’s a second invitation from Trump and acceptance from Zelensky.
So the order of things is
- April 21: Trump invites Zelensky for the first time.
- July 25: Volker texts with Zelesnky aid about pre-conditions for meeting
- July 25 (hours after Volker texts): Trump invites Zelensky a second time; Zelensky accepts for a second time. No mention or implication of pre-conditions.
Democrats might point to U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Bill Taylor’s texts with Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland: “Are we now saying that security assistance and WH meeting are conditioned on investigations,” and “As I said on the phone, I think it’s crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign.”
Sondland responded, “The president has been crystal clear no quid pro quo’s of any kind.”
He went on to text, “The president is trying to evaluate whether Ukraine is truly going to adopt the transparency and reforms that President Zelensky promised during his campaign I suggest we stop the back and forth by text.”
What was missing from that text? Anything along the lines of “the president will not honor his invitation to Zelensky until Zelensky does x, y, and z.”
This leaves the Democrats with a distinct problem: There’s zero proof that Trump himself had any preconditions for the meeting. All the Democrats have are texts among bureaucrats from the State Department (which is notoriously liberal, establishment and globalist) discussing what they say the White House wants.
In addition to that lack of proof, the Democrats also have to contend with Trump personally inviting Zelensky to the White House, not once but twice.
Trump had absolutely no reason to invite Zelensky if he didn’t plan to honor the invitation.
Remember, we’re all told that Trump’s a bully, a jerk, a cowboy who intimidates people and uses brute force to get them to do what he wants.
The transcripts were classified and would only come out if Trump released them. No one would ever read what was said there. So why, if Trump was going to play hardball, did he not start right then and there? Why invite Zelensky, no strings attached, just to turn around and have his minions reverse the invitation? If anything that would make Trump look weak, either unwilling or unable to handle his own dirty work.
This new transcript of the first phone call between Trump and Zelensky should destroy all claims of any quid pro quo involving a Zelensky White House visit.
The Democrats will, of course, ignore it. But come November 2020, voters may well remember yet another time Democrats have attempted to deceive them
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)