Impeachment is a Problem

For only the forth time in United States history our President is subject of an impeachment inquiry in the House of Representatives. The charges against President Donald J. Trump, according to Democrats, is that he used his office to ask the President of Ukraine to investigate his political opponent former Vice-President Joe Biden, who remains the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination. Democrats claim the President withheld military aide to Ukraine, which had been approved by Congress, until Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky publicly announced the investigation of Biden, and Ukraine energy company Burisma Holdings where Biden’s son Hunter Biden served as a highly paid member of the Board of Directors.

The number of things WRONG with the Democrats action in this matter are numerous. But let’s just list a few.

1. Article II of the US Constitution enunciates the powers of the President. It gives the President sole determinative power over foreign policy, and communications with foreign Ambassadors and Representatives. It also gives him sole power over commanding our military. Like it or not the July 25th phone call between Zelensky and Trump was part of the operation of foreign policy for which Trump is exclusively in charge.

2. Democrats can’t even articulate what crime(s) or to quote the Constitution, high crimes or misdemeanors, Trump committed. The closest thing you will hear to an actual claim of criminal conduct is “Abuse of Power”. But, as we have already established, since Trump has sole authority in the practice of foreign relations how he talks with foreign leaders and what he says is largely whatever he wants; within the bounds of reality. Not liking what he said or how he said it does not rise to the level of criminal conduct.

3. The money was delivered. Though Trump admits putting a hold on the military aide to Ukraine, the money was ultimately delivered. And, it was delivered before such time as Democrats made the world aware of this whole situation.

4. The investigation didn’t take place. The transcript from the July 25th phone call indicates that amongst other things Trump did ask Zelensky to “look into” the Burisma corruption situation. So, there is no arguing that Trump wanted the connection to Biden investigated. But, ultimately Zelensky ignored the request. And the money was still delivered.

5. The Biden’s CLEARLY did something wrong, if not illegal. Newly released emails show that Ukrainian officials sought a meeting with the Obama Administration using the fact that Hunter Biden was on the Burisma Board as leverage to gain such a meeting. Joe Biden famously brags about the fact that he ordered Ukraine to fire a Prosecutor who was investigating Burisma for corruption. At best Ukraine and Burisma specifically used Hunter Biden to gain favor with the Vice-President and the Obama Administration. THIS IS PERFECTLY CLEAR. At worst, both the Biden’s enriched themselves in exchange for using’s Joe Biden’s considerable influence and access to gain money and favors from the United States. Such corruption is illegal and possibly treasonous. On January 20, 2017 Donald Trump was sworn in as President and with his hand on the Bible promised to the best of his Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. By seeking foreign assistance in investigating corrupt and possibly treasonous activity by a past Vice-President and someone seeking the Presidency, Trump was certainly abiding by that oath.

I’m not naive enough to believe Trump wasn’t happy to investigate and smear his primary Presidential opponent. But that’s incidental to a legitimate investigation.

6. Trump will not be removed from office. Upon being impeached by the House, The Constitution requires that a trial for removal from office be held in the Senate, and that removal can only take place when 2/3 (or 67) Senators vote for the President’s removal. For that to happen 20 Republican Senators would have to join ALL 47 Democratic Senators in voting for removal. There is absolutely no indication that Democrats can get 20 Republicans to go along with such a vote.

The impeachment inquiry is purely political. It’s destructive to the country. It prevents other important matters from being discussed, and fixed.

Democrats have been boasting that they would impeach this President since the day he won election, before taking office. They have been pursuing it ever since. Now only 12 months before the next Presidential election they were forced to placate their zealous base and do it now or never.

On the good news side, upon impeaching and failing to remove President Trump from office I think his chances for re-election are pretty good; and I think the likelihood of Democrats trying this again in Trump’s 2nd term are slim.

But then again, Democrats have proven that they are simply crazy. So they might.

IMPEACHMENT: You are being manipulated

On Tuesday September 24, 2019 U.S. House Speaker Nanci Pelosi announced a formal impeachment inquiry into President Donald Trump. She did so based on the second hand, hearsay reports from a so-called whistleblower claiming Trump pressured the new President of Ukraine to investigated Democratic Presidential candidate and former Vice-President Joe Biden’s involvement and motives in pressuring the previous Ukrainian President to fire a Ukrainian Prosecutor who was investigating alleged corruption in a Ukrainian oil company who happened to have Biden’s son Hunter as a member of their Board of Directors.

It’s pretty clear to fair minded individuals that this impeachment inquiry is pure politics and not based on substance whatsoever. It can’t be coincidence that once Trump knowingly took a step toward one of his biggest campaign themes, to drain the swamp, that Democrats finally went ahead with pursuing impeachment after having threatened to do so for nearly three years, since the day Donald Trump was elected President.

To properly examine this whole story, you have to start at the beginning. And the beginning starts with Hunter Biden. Joe Biden freely admits, in fact, he brags that he pressured Ukraine to fire the Prosecutor that was investigating his son’s company. So there is no argument that Trump’s inquiry into this fact has merit. Democrats argue that Biden’s actions were completely legitimate because the Prosecutor in question was widely believed to be extremely corrupt. The fact that the firing ended the investigation into the oil company, freeing Hunter Biden to profit enormously, was coincidental. Really? Ok. But just remember that making this judgment relies entirely on believing what Joe Biden’s claimed motivation was. Nothing to see here, move along…

The fact is the 49 year old Hunter Biden has been a troubled individual being held up by his powerful father for decades. He’s never done anything on his own to warrant the jobs, positions, and income he’s received. A July 1, 2019 article in the New Yorker Magazine entitled, “Will Hunter Biden Jeopardize His Father’s Campaign?” included these two paragraphs:

“At the same time, the gossip pages have seized on Hunter’s tumultuous private life. He has struggled for decades with alcohol addiction and drug abuse; he went through an acrimonious divorce from his first wife, Kathleen Buhle Biden; and he had a subsequent relationship with (brother Beau Biden) Beau’s widow, Hallie. He was recently sued for child support by an Arkansas woman, Lunden Alexis Roberts, who claims that he is the father of her child. (Hunter has denied having sexual relations with Roberts.)

On May 17th, the day before Hunter planned to appear at one of his father’s rallies, at Eakins Oval, in Philadelphia, Breitbart News published a story based on a Prescott, Arizona, police report from 2016 that named Hunter as the suspect in a possible narcotics offense.”

And Hunter Biden’s problems are not some decades old problems dug up from total obscurity by his father’s political enemies. In 2013 while serving in the Naval Reserve Hunter Biden tested positive for cocaine. He was booted out of the Naval Reserve in 2014 because of that failed drug test.

So helping out his troubled adult kid had nothing to do with Biden’s threat to withhold U.S. funds from Ukraine unless the Ukraine government did as he said? Nothing to see here. Move along, move along.

Did President Trump withhold U.S. military/Defense funds from Ukraine and pressure the Ukrainian President in order to learn some dirt on his political opponent Joe Biden? Yes, I think it’s possible he did. Is that impeachable? Of course, it’s an abuse of power.

But here’s the thing, Trump says that wasn’t his motivation and the transcripts from the phone conversation don’t specifically reveal any instance where Trump threatened Ukraine in any way or specifically expressed a desire to harm Biden or “get” Biden. The transcript instead points to Trump saying during this July 2019 phone call that he wanted to learn more about the whole Biden affair and how it might have led to the Russian Hoax investigation that Democrats Championed for two years as the means by which they would topple his presidency. So, just like Biden, Trump had other motivations for asking for the President of Ukraine’s help. Harming his political opponent, Biden, was just coincidental.

Do you see what I’m saying? The media and Democrats readily agree to believe Biden’s motivation was pure and had nothing to do with saving his troubled son’s ass. They merely take his word for it. Trump had other motivations too. But according to Democrats and the MSM the only reason for the President of the United States to look into possible corruption in our country’s previous Administration was political. The hypocrisy couldn’t be more thick. And let us not forget, Hillary Clinton hired a British spy to gather dirt (or fabricate it) on Donald Trump from powerful Russian sources, allegedly including some in the government. Isn’t this exactly what they are accusing Trump of doing?

Trump isn’t a choir boy. I’m sure he was more than happy to have the side benefit of injuring Biden. But Trump has been harassed and defamed more harshly than any President since Nixon, and probably more than Nixon or anyone else. In spite of it all he has maintained a frenetic Administration hell-bent on keeping his campaign promises. And draining the swamp was a big one. Pelosi, Biden, Obama and the Clintons are powerful people, even now. It is not in any of their interests to allow Trump to look into their dealings. And Trump is getting close. The IG report will come out soon. Indictments could follow. Deals could be made. Secrets could be revealed. Trump’s gotta go. They can’t wait 14 months for an election…that they are increasingly likely to lose.

Book Review: The Man Who Killed Kennedy: The Case Against LBJ

In having completed my reading of Roger Stone’s 2013 Book The Man Who Killed Kennedy: The Case Against LBJ I expanded my vast knowledge of the murder case of John F. Kennedy rather substantially. And I say this knowing I am already an expert on the subject. I have read and watched so many of the Kennedy conspiracy books and tv documentaries and movies. I have visited Dealey Plaza and walked throughout the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository building. And I’ve written extensively on the subject including Here is why Oswald is Not the Shooter https://mschuettblahblahblah.com/…/here-is-why-oswald-is-n…/ and Oswald Did Not Shoot JFK https://mschuettblahblahblah.com/…/oswald-did-not-shoot-jfk/
Stone has been in the news a lot in the past year because of his connection to Donald Trump and the indictments he faces from the Mueller Investigation. He has been a Republican operative since the 1960s.
The book is well written, and really pulled me in. But it never closed the sale on me. I do believe Lynden Baines Johnson had knowledge and possibly involvement in the assassination of our President. But Stone didn’t prove it. He just made my unverified suspicions stronger.
According to Stone Johnson hated John and Robert Kennedy and the Kennedy brothers hated him. This is not news. But Stone gets deeper into Johnson’s history and character than I’ve ever read. He alleges that Johnson furthered his political career through 7 murders he orchestrated prior to becoming Vice-President. He strongly infers Johnson was corrupt and profited from the Vietnam War thanks to his close associations with Bell Helicopter and Brown and Root. This is also not news in having been claimed in Oliver Stone’s movie JFK thirty years ago.
Stone also does a good job of defending the alleged assassin Lee Harvey Oswald; who in my opinion is clearly not responsible for Kennedy’s death.
Stone names Malcolm Wallace as the shooter of Kennedy. But he loses credibility because he also alleges a second and possibly third shooter but never names them. Wallace died in 1971 in a car crash (suspicious) near Pittsburg, Texas.
Stone identifies a large number of persons with connections to the Kennedy assassination who died suspiciously near the time of the Warren Commission Report and 14 years later prior to testifying before the House Select Committee on Assassinations.
The book is a great read. If you have an interest in these things go pick it up at your local library, like I did. And while a good book, it’s not a conviction for the clearly diabolical, and power hungry LBJ.
Maybe someday all the files can be released (President Trump?!!!) and we’ll get some answers to this 56 year old crime.

The Seattle Times is Silly. Electoral College will stay.

The Seattle Times newspaper has joined the whiny call of liberals all over the country in calling for the elimination of the Electoral College used to choose our nation’s President.

As part of their argument for this voter disenfranchisement of their reader’s the Time’s Editors erroneously point out that the need which created the Electoral College in our Constitution in 1789 no longer exist. They correctly point our that it was part of a compromise to encourage smaller agrarian southern states to join the union when they were afraid of being dominated by the more populous northern states. That need for preventing domination of smaller states by larger states still exists. The geography has changed. But look no further than the 2016 election map results to see how dominating urban centers could be in our Presidential elections if not for the Electoral College.

While red indicates the counties that voted for Trump and blue indicates the counties that voted for Clinton, Clinton won the popular vote.

Time magazine reported that Trump won 2649 counties nationwide, while Clinton won 503. Were the U.S. to rely on the popular vote for electing our President the vast majority of the country would be serfs to the oligarchs in New York and Los Angeles.

I believe in the individual rights and liberty granted me by the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. And I defend those rights. It’s amazing to me why Democrats continually want to give away those rights. They want to give away our 2nd Amendment Rights to have guns. They increasingly want to eliminate our first Amendment Rights to Free speech by suppressing what words we can say and what hats (MAGA) we can wear. They want to continue to defile the intent of the 14th Amendment by giving away our citizenship to the children of illegal aliens born within our borders who maintain citizenship in the countries from which their parents came. They want to eliminate first Amendment Rights to religion by ostracizing those who practice it, especially Christians.

And because they don’t like Donald Trump they want to eliminate the Presidential voting rights of 95% of the country.

The argument for a nationwide popular vote rests on the myth that such a change would allow for 1 person, 1 vote. It’s a myth because of the human nature of group think and self-interest. Blacks tend to vote one way. Whites tend to vote another way. Men tend to vote a certain way. Women, Jews, Christians, Catholics etc. etc. A national popular vote would put our nations Presidency strictly in the hands of urban voters. More specifically it would put the Presidency strictly in the hands of New York and Los Angeles.

Thank God the Founding Fathers found the compromises necessary to create the Constitution. A lot of people in Wyoming, Delaware, Montana, Alaska, North and South Dakota and Vermont might resent only having a single representative in the U.S. House while California has 53, New York has 27, Texas 36, Florida 27, Pennsylvania 18, Illinois 18. Only 6 states make up 41% of the House. 15 states have 3 or fewer House Representatives. More than half the states, 26, have a total of only 77 Representatives or less than 18 percent of the House’s 435 members. As such the more populous states have a gigantic voting advantage over the less populous states.

If this isn’t all about hating Trump and its about 1 man 1 vote why wouldn’t they argue against our bicameral Congress? Why not eliminate the Senate? After all the small states get 2 votes there, same as the more populous states. To properly understand the wisdom of the Founding Fathers you have to understand the balance they had to achieve in order to form a more perfect union.

Ultimately this is a silly argument because eliminating the Electoral College would require a Constitutional Convention and ratification of any Amendments by 3/4 of the states. Fortunately, as pointed out here, a majority of the states are small and even if such a Convention took place and even if an Amendment were adopted (both of which are highly unlikely) there are not enough idiots who think we live in a Democracy throughout the smaller states to commit political suicide and totally disenfranchise their voters. It won’t happen. And we can thank God for it.

Foreign Interference in U.S. Elections- Old News

Barack Obama, address a huge crowd in Berlin in 2008

In July 2008, though not yet officially the Democratic Presidential nominee, and officially only a first term U.S. Senator not yet through his 2nd year Barrack Obama toured Europe and the Middle East. He was given meetings with the Presidents or Prime Ministers of Great Britain, Germany, France, Palestine, Iraq, Israel, and Afghanistan. At the time those people were leftist in their politics and not fans of George Bush, John McCain, or Republicans in general. He also gave several speeches including one shown here in Berlin in which these foreign governments gave unprecedented support and exposure for a U.S. politician, not yet President. Tell me again, please, how it’s wrong to accept the help of foreign nations in the influencing of our elections. The FACT is that it’s been occurring for decades, if not more than a century, AS IT SHOULD. Think about it. If you are a leader in another country and want the best for your people it would be a dereliction of duty for you not to try and influence the U.S. Presidential election in your favor. We are talking about the most powerful country on the planet, and the person who will assume the mantle of the most powerful person in the world. For this reason alone I’ve always been bewildered by the faux outrage over the minimal amount of “interference” Russia presumably exercised on the 2016 election. Perhaps, this is also why the Obama Administration, while knowing it was occurring, did nothing…because they knew it to be typical, normal, and historically accepted. It only becomes unwelcome when the other guy wins. Don’t you think?”

  • Calendar

    • January 2021
      M T W T F S S
       123
      45678910
      11121314151617
      18192021222324
      25262728293031
  • Search