The impeachment trap laid by Andrew Weissmann and why it had to fail

 

Whether he realizes it or not, Andrew Weissmann just admitted what we always knew:

The purpose of the Mueller investigation was “trying to get rid of” President Trump and laying a perjury trap. While it sounds reasonable on paper for Trump and others to” just make a statement and clear things up,” and for the uninitiated it sounds reasonable. It is why when you are asked by authorities for a statement it is now wise to be represented by an attorney. This is what we have come to. Ask Flynn how it worked out for him.

That was the first salvo. No surprise. May have to click on clip a couple of times.

 

 

Mustang gives us his thoughts on the impeachment.

What is a high crime or misdemeanor?  The answer will always depend on whom you ask, and when you ask them.  The US House of Representatives impeached President Donald J. Trump because they believed it was in their own interests to do so—not to see that the President was found guilty of serious offenses against the Republic or its people, but because President Trump had the unmitigated gall to win the last presidential election, and because Mr. Trump is well placed, politically, to win re-election later this year.

The elections in November 2020 would be a good time to remind Democrats and Republicans alike, that their duty is something more than self-interested cleverness and blind obedience to the dictates of party bosses.

In practical terms, an impeachable offense is whatever the United States house of Representatives says that it is —with one caveat: when the members of the U. S. House of Representatives are acting pursuant to the duties they have sworn to uphold, and not out of narrow, calculating self-interests.

A political concern vis-à-vis the office of the President of the United States is one thing, a political self-interest vis-à-vis the office of the President of the United States is another.  Public corruption undermines our constitutionally formed institutions and it distorts our democratic processes.  US law, or at least as it seems to me, fails to adequately defend the Republic (and its people) against corruption.

This is what the foundational law of the United States requires, but the precise meaning of the phrase “high crimes and misdemeanors” is not defined in the U. S. Constitution.  In England in the 17th and 18th centuries, the phrase was construed to mean corrupt activity by those who have special duties that are not shared with common persons.  An ordinary person cannot be charged with high crimes and misdemeanors, but they can be charged with treason and bribery.

 

Impeachable Offenses

Article I, Section 2, Clause 5

The House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

Article I, Section 3, Clauses 6 and 7

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two-thirds of the Members present.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States; but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

Article II, Section 4

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanor

As Kevin D. Williamson recently reminded us in National Review, “It would be a good thing if the American people had more confidence in our federal government.  It would be a better thing if our government deserved the confidence of the American people.”  Williamson is the author of The Smallest Minority: Independent Thinking in an Age of Mob Politics.

Mustang also blogs at Fix Bayonets and Thoughts From Afar

Other than that all is well in the swamp.

Thanks and welcome If All You See… » Pirate’s Cove for blog of the day.

Romney and Bain Capital – his start at building an evil empire

Romney’s appears as a tortured sanctimonious man, praying profusely over his decision whether to send a spear Trump’s way in the impeachment saga. So he claims in his presentations to the media and on the Senate floor. There is much more to Mitt Romney. This noble man who is nothing more than a political hack, who made his money the old fashioned way that the Progressives so often remind us as offensive. A chip off the old block of his dad George Romney. I give you an old post about Romney – there are so many – but this one let’s us know just how he got to where he did,

“Profoundly religious” starts his motif.

Refresher: Romney and Bain Capital – a Company ‘Harvester’

How about a refresher now that Romney has arisen like the “Ghost of Christmas past.”

How easy to forget what a swamp creature he was and is, and we should not be surprised that he couldn’t even wait to be sworn in to attack Trump. His baby – Bain Capital. The harvester which bought distressed companies, attempted to make improvements, but not to worry. If they failed they simply sold their assets, went bankrupt with employees losing their pensions in some cases then on to the next – wash, rinse and repeat. He no doubt was successful. There is no doubt had a couple of super hits – Staples being one.

Here are a few snippets:

But at Bain, Romney’s top priority wasn’t to boost employment. As the Wall Street Journal recently noted, creating jobs “wasn’t the aim of Bain or other private-equity firms, which measure success by returns produced for investors.” And, the newspaper reported, Romney’s 100,000-jobs claim is tough to evaluate.

Mother Jones has obtained a video from 1985 in which Romney, describing Bain’s formation, showed how he viewed the firm’s mission. He explained that its goal was to identify potential and hidden value in companies, buy significant stakes in these businesses, and then “harvest them at a significant profit” within five to eight years.

……But this short clip offers a glimpse of Romney when he was at the start of his private equity career and saw businesses as targets of opportunity that could be harvested for the benefit of his investors, not as long-term job creators or participants in a larger community. His remarks were hardly surprising, but they did encapsulate the mindset of get-in/get-out private equity deal makers.

H/T: Mother Jones

This video was created in 1985.

Mitt Romney on Bain’s plan to buy and “harvest” companies

Oh, by the way Romney was against calling the whistle blower. Now he no longer has to worry about his involvement in the Ukraine matter. He will just say Trump is out to get him, his political adversary. See how the game works?

Romney’s National Security Adviser? Burisma Board Member Cofer Black

You see, all remains well in the swamp.

Adam Schiff – Who is he, where did he come from, why is he here?

 

So, then, who is Adam Schiff?

by Mustang

He was born in Framingham, Massachusetts, the son of Edward and Sherill, a Jewish family.  Edward was a staunch Democrat, his wife a Republican.  Adam Schiff’s material grandfather was a Republican committee chairman back when there were such things as Republicans in Massachusetts.  After living two years in Arizona, the Schiff family moved to California.

Adam Schiff

Adam received a BA in political science from Stanford University in 1982, and a JD from Harvard in 1985.  Following college, he worked as a law clerk in the US District Court for Central California.  From 1987-93, he worked as an assistant US attorney for the Central District.

As a federal prosecutor, his one chance to shine came with the federal prosecution of Richard Miller, an FBI agent caught in a sex-for-secrets affair with a Soviet honey trap.  The liberal press claimed that “he made a name for himself” in this case, and that’s undeniably true.

The Miller case went to trial on three occasions, two of which were spearheaded by Adam Schiff.  The first trial ended in a hung jury.  The second trial found Miller guilty, but the prosecution’s case was so wrought with irregularities that a high court threw it out.  Miller’s third trial was headed by someone other than Schiff, so Miller was finally found guilty.

Confronted with such overwhelming incompetence, Schiff decided that his only hope for success, given who he really is, would be in politics.  Schiff’s congressional district sits comfortably along the green foothills of the San Gabriel mountains, an affluent splotch of solidly Democratic waste northeast of Los Angeles.

His constituents are wealthy film and television personalities (Harvey Weinstein most likely included), Burbank studio producers, and people who work at the Jet Propulsion Lab in Pasadena.  Schiff claims to be the Congressman for the Stars and Mars.  He’s probably right about that.  His introduction of US House Resolution 106 recognizes the Armenian Genocide (2007), which gave Schiff the support of a large number of Armenian-Americans living in his congressional district.

So far, however—after twenty years in Congress, Schiff’s signature legislation involves a federally mandated reduction of unwanted helicopter noise, which forced the Federal Aviation Administration to “study and regulate helicopter noise in Los Angeles.”  It was known as the Helicopter Noise Relief Act.

He’s not the only dirty trickster, either.  Former CIA Director John Brennan lied under oath in testimony before Congress about the “Russian dossier.”  There was no Russian dossier … it was a dossier manufactured by the DNC with full knowledge and complicity of Hillary Rodham Clinton, illegally used to obtain court sanctioned warrants to surveil members and former members of the Trump presidential campaign.

Adam Schiff sits at the top of the roster of dirty Democrats.  He places partisanship ahead of patriotism, but he’s merely one of dozens of Democrats who have not earned the trust of the American people, and whose political behavior endangers us all.

Over the past ten years, the point person for the new communist (Democratic) party and chairperson of the low-down dirty tricks committee has been House Representative Adam Schiff.  No other Democrat is better suited for this role because he exceeds all the necessary criteria: he’s corrupted, deceitful, deceptive, fraudulent, shady, sneaky, underhanded, misleading, unprincipled, unscrupulous, bluffing, cunning, disreputable, mendacious, perfidious, treacherous, two-faced, and traitorous.

Oh, and also contemptible, disgraceful, loathsome, base, ignominious, and slimy.  In effect, Adam Schiff is the kind of person who would make Joseph Stalin jealous.

Nowhere, and at no time has this been better revealed to us than the lies and distortions, the long list of dirty tricks Schiff’s pulled on Donald J. Trump.  He stated publicly, on several occasions, that he had direct evidence of Mr. Trump’s collusion with foreign agents to seize the White House in 2016.

There was never any evidence of Trump’s collusion because there was no collusion, so when Schiff proclaimed that Trump was guilty of treason, he was lying.  He later denied ever accusing Trump of treason, and that was another lie.

When accused by a colleague of criminal behavior, which is to say Adam Schiff’s participation in the campaign to spy on the President and White House/campaign staffers, Schiff filed an ethics complaint against Representative Devin Nunes.

In March 2017, during an interview on MSNBC, Schiff claimed that there was more than “circumstantial evidence” of Trump’s collusion.  He lied.  In July, when asked about whether Nunes was trying to cover for Trump by claiming that the Obama White House spied on the Trump campaign, Schiff said, “It certainly is an attempt to distract …”

Schiff became the chair of the House Intelligence Committee in 2019 and undertook a personal mission to investigate President Trump.  Responding to whether he would accept the Special Counsel’s investigation results, the utterly inept former federal prosecutor answered, “… there may be, for example, evidence of collusion or conspiracy that is clear and convincing, but not proof beyond a reasonable doubt, as is needed for a criminal conviction.”

Fellow California congress person Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the U. S. House of Representatives, named Adam Schiff as lead impeachment manager.  If Pelosi was serious about impeaching the president, why would she appoint Schiff to this duty?

Dirty tricks aren’t new in American politics.  In fact, they’ve been with us from the very beginning when incumbent President George Washington was reluctantly running for re-election.  With the aim of keeping him from winning a second term, hostile news agents attacked Washington’s policies.

When that didn’t work, and after Mr. Washington was unanimously reelected to the presidency, newspapers began attacking him personally, apparently upset by the fact that New York governor George Clinton lost his bid for the vice presidency to John Adams.  Their goal was clear: besmirch Washington and at the same time, cast doubt upon the qualifications of John Adams with every intention to keep Adams out of the White House in future elections.

Clinton.  Clinton.  Where have I heard that name before?

After the election of 1792, the news media began a series of personal attacks against Mr. Washington.  Nor should we today be too surprised to learn that the man behind these attacks was Thomas Jefferson, who hated Alexander Hamilton with a passion and felt anger toward Washington for favoring Hamilton’s opinions over his own.  Jefferson thus relied upon Philip Freneau of the National Gazette and Benjamin F. Bache at the Aurora to unleash venomous attacks against Washington.

By 1795, the harsh language reflected a profound mutual distrust between Federalists (Washington’s party) and the Democratic-Republicans (Jefferson’s party), each seeing in the other a fundamental danger to the future of the country.

Jefferson’s efforts backfired, however —as many smear campaigns do— but his efforts did establish the precedent that remains with us today.  As an aside, George Washington, who has been dead now for going on 221 years, remains the subject of media smear campaigns.

Several years ago, CBS News (Sunday Morning) and the New York Times ran with a story about several black women who claimed that they were descendants of Washington through a man named West Ford, the illegitimate son of George Washington, who regularly visited a slave woman named Venus, owned by George Washington’s half-brother John.

It was an intentional smear because (1) there is no evidence to bolster such spurious claims, and (2) there never will be any evidence because George Washington, having suffered the effects of Scarlet and Rheumatic Fever, was rendered sterile.  George Washington had no descendants.

It is interesting, though, how the political left leaves no stone unturned in their attempts to destroy our nation’s history.  They know, as do we all, that attacking our history at the same time destroys our culture, the things we value (as Americans). It is an insidious campaign.  The same sort of sleaze that existed in the 1790s remains with us today —which does not speak well of our modern politicians or the society that supports them.

Of course, both parties have been guilty of past dirty tricks and smear campaigns.

The Republican Party (the youngest of the two) has a pamphlet governing dirty tricks and smear tactics kept under lock and key in the lower drawer of the GOP committee chairman’s desk.

Democrats, on the other hand, have a ten-volume set of strategies widely distributed to every Democratic politician/communist wannabe and every liberal newsroom in the English-speaking world —and they are never tired of using them.

 

Mustang also blogs at Fix Bayonets and Thoughts From Afar

Other than that all is well in the swamp.

For the best in conservative news

 

 

 

 

Schiff’s last gasp: ‘Trump could offer Alaska to the Russians in exchange for help’

 

Adam Schiff said Monday in his closing argument that if Trump is not removed from office he may offer Alaska to the Russians in exchange for help in the next election.

Schiff also said that Trump may escape to Mar-a-Lago permanently and let his son-in-law Jared Kushner run the country.

He has shown himself to be as mentally unhinged as most of us had already figured out.

“Trump could offer Alaska to the Russians in exchange for support in the next election or decide to move to Mar-a-Lago permanently and let Jared Kushner run the country, delegating to him the decision whether they go to war,” Schiff said as he argued for Trump’s removal.

May have to click on the clip a couple of times.

 

 

Thankfully this salvo by the Democrats is coming to an end. Stay tuned for the next chapter. Looks like we are off of the Ukraine business and on to Iowa. I had put this together before the Iowa meltdown,

Other than that all is well in the swamp.

For the best in conservative news

 

Impeachment: Schiff 1 to Trump’s 0 – what were Trump’s attorneys thinking?

 

No, they never wanted Donald J. Trump to be President.

We know that. No news there. It was a disappointing beginning regarding the impeachment hearing on Trump’s side. More than disappointing. It was a walk away for the Democrats. They were locked and loaded with a full blown Case in Chief with Trump’s  attorneys caught flat footed. Apparently they thought two hours of arguments for each witness amendment didn’t include them for the most part.

What did they think was going to happen when the Democrats were given this time? Wise old crusty McConnell had to know what the Dems would do with the time. Schiff came with the requisite audio-visuals straight from the House proceedings. Of course not the statements that had been disproven by Trump’s attorneys. The most Trump’s attorney could muster at times was “can’t we get the trial started?’ Hate to tell them but it was well underway. First impressions mean everything. Those who may not have followed the House hearing got the full bore evidence as they determined it to be.

Even stalwart conservative commenters last night had to ask how did the Lev Parnas and other information presented ever allowed that was not even in the House proceedings.

Where was the fire and brimstone? The righteous indignation?

No surprise here. I was no doubt one of about a dozen who managed to sit through the entire House hearing. I knew what was coming. I knew the counter arguments to these witnesses. Did not Trump’s attorneys listen as well?

No question there will be witnesses.

OK….that’s my opinion. What’s yours?

Here is something to help us buck up!

Everything swell in the swamp, Super swampy today.

 

Just who in the world is Lev Parnas?

 

In the news …

by Mustang

The House of Representative’s ace in the hole is everything we’ve come to expect of the Democratic Party.  Lev Parnas is that ace Democrats have been placing all their hopes on for a conviction of Donald J. Trump in the United States Senate, Mr. Trump and his legal team must be celebrating his acquittal even before the trial begins.

Lev Parnas is a Ukrainian-American “businessman” who has said that he’s got the goods on President Trump’s misconduct, which Democrats contend involves a conspiracy with Ukrainian officials to derail the presidential candidacy of Joe Biden.  Lev Parnas claims that he participated with the Trump administration in the search for detrimental information concerning Trump’s political opponents.

Parnas claims that he has proof against Trump/Giuliani, including a photograph taken with Trump.  The photograph was taken in 2006, which in case anyone is paying attention, was a full ten years ahead of the 2016 presidential elections.

So then, who is this guy?

Lev Parnas was born in Odessa, Ukraine, when Ukraine was still a satellite of the Soviet Union.  He migrated to the United States when he was about 3-years old.  He grew up in Detroit, Michigan and then later in Brooklyn, New York.  As a recent graduate from Baruch College, he worked for Kings Highway Realty, where he sold Trump Organization co-op apartments.

 

Parnas and Giuliani

In 1996, Parnas moved to Florida where he worked in several businesses involving real estate, securities, precious metals, and then ended up starting his own company, which he named Parnas Holdings.  After failing in a film project, he partnered with Igor Fruman in an energy venture.

According to the Miami Herald, Parnas owes more debt than he has net worth.  Igor Fruman was born in Belarus, migrated to the United States, and lived in Detroit, Michigan before migrating to South Florida.

His business interests have been an import/export company, a beach bar in Ukraine, and fund-raising for Jewish charities.  He is also an associate of Ihor Kolomoyskyi, a wealthy Ukrainian who is under investigation by the Department of Justice for money laundering.

At this point, one might wonder what benefit Democrats think Parnas could offer their case against Trump, but it gets worse.

 

Democrats contend that Lev and Igor are (or have been) associates of Rudy Giuliani and former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee.  According to CNN, the two men were recently arrested because of their involvement in an effort to influence US politics and policy through foreign funds paid to members of congress.

So far in the investigation, however, all we know for certain is that Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman had lunch with Giuliani a few hours before they were arrested by the FBI.  Then, according to journalist Peter Weber, Giuliani is guilty of taking Igor to the state funeral of George H. W. Bush.

Grasping at straws comes to mind.

Lev Parnas is the founder and CEO of a company called Fraud Guarantee.  Fraud Guarantee hired Giuliani Partners to provide legal advice, allegedly paying Giuliani’s firm a half-million dollars for their services.

Another allegation is that Florida officials may have dissolved Fraud Guarantee before it hired Giuliani’s consulting firm because Fraud Guarantee failed to file an annual report.  When did the state of Florida take this action?  In 2014.  Whether any of this is true may not matter, because unless someone alleges that Giuliani accepted the half-million dollars as a bribe, there is no crime in accepting money in exchange for services rendered so long as the services are legal.

To the best of my knowledge, offering legal advice is still a lawful enterprise.  More to the point, Mr. Giuliani’s status of Mr. Trump’s personal attorney does not preclude Giuliani from having other clients.  No one alleges any wrongdoing by Giuliani Partners, but everyone with a progressive agenda is happy to imply that Giuliani is somehow guilty by association.

According to Parnas’ story, Giuliani sent he and Igor to Ukraine in late 2018 to look for damaging information about President Trump’s political opponent, Joe Biden —I suppose in a somewhat similar fashion to the DNC’s concoction of the Steele Dossier. In November 2019, Parnas told CNN that he would be willing to testify to Congress regarding these activities, which also involved Representative Devin Nunes.  Soon after, everyone in the Democratic Party wet themselves.

Maybe Parnas’ testimony will work out for House Democrats, but Parnas and Fruman were arrested by the FBI on 9 Oct 2019 and charged with planning to transfer funds from a foreign government to US officials.  So, this actually may not go in the direction House Democrats hoped.

In 2018, Parnas and Fruman donated funds and pledge further additional money to an unnamed member of Congress, who was “recruited” for the campaign to oust US Ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch.  These were donations that not only violated campaign limits but were also funneled to the congress-critter through a shell company.  Former Representative Pete Sessions is believed to be the “officially unnamed” member of congress.

As my good friend Bunkerville keeps reminding us, all is well in the swamp.

____________

That which is not good for the beehive cannot be good for the bees.  —Marcus Aurelius

 

Mustang also blogs at Fix Bayonets and Thoughts From Afar

 

Nancy Pelosi says she has to miss Saturday’s 49ers-Viking because of Trump

 

Anyone who happened upon Nancy Pelosi’s presser yesterday has learned that what was thought is now true. She has now succumbed to Trump derangement syndrome.

She supports Iran over the U.S regarding the taking out of one bad actor.

Impeachment? Now that is one big joke.

Most importantly she will miss the  Saturday’s 49ers-Viking. Saving us from Trump comes first. I give you the important point first.

 

 

She will clutch those impeachment documents and we will have to pry them from her cold dead hands.

 

The internet can be such a challenge for the old war horses now. Their previous positions so easily come back to life.

 

That’s it folks. The best I can muster on a crazy bizarro week.

For the best in news

 

%d bloggers like this: