Had enough yet

[mark blazejewski]

Ten months to election day, a day when Trump can be officially removed from office by the public. The Dems have bloodied him in this process and are confident of victory, but still feel the need to have him removed from office.

Election Day 2016 is the reason for this ongoing coup; Election Day 2020 is their greatest nightmare because...

[mark blazejewski]

I just listened to Senator Jacobs on "Hardline."

I am somewhat concerned by his response to a question concerning the charges against President Trump now before the Senate.

If I understood Senator Jacobs' response correctly, he said that whatever Trump may have done "did not rise to the level of Impeachment."

My question is: "What exact transgression does Senator Jacobs believe that the President may have committed that does not 'rise to the level' of an Impeachable offense?"

Unless I have missed something, I am not aware of any allegation of any specific violation, of any any specific criminal statute, that is resident in the Impeachment indictment. I am only aware of the Democrats' very curious "perceptions" of "Abuse of Power," and what is in my opinion, a ridiculous holding that Trump's proper exertion(s) of the President's responsibilities in support of the doctrine of Separation of Powers constituted "Obstruction of Congress."

I am of the strong opinion that the House Democrats have wantonly weaponized the Impeachment process in support of a partisan coup d'etat.


Attention directed to 6:30, Hour One of Hardline show, January 26, 2020...

https://wben.radio.com/media/podcast...m-latest-audio

[Lee Chowaniec]

I just listened to Senator Jacobs on "Hardline."

I am somewhat concerned by his response to a question concerning the charges against President Trump now before the Senate.

If I understood Senator Jacobs' response correctly, he said that whatever Trump may have done "did not rise to the level of Impeachment."

My question is: "What exact transgression does Senator Jacobs believe that the President may have committed that does not 'rise to the level' of an Impeachable offense?"

Unless I have missed something, I am not aware of any allegation of any specific violation, of any any specific criminal statute, that is resident in the Impeachment indictment. I am only aware of the Democrats' very curious "perceptions" of "Abuse of Power," and what is in my opinion, a ridiculous holding that Trump's proper exertion(s) of the President's responsibilities in support of the doctrine of Separation of Powers constituted "Obstruction of Congress."

I am of the strong opinion that the House Democrats have wantonly weaponized the Impeachment process in support of a partisan coup d'etat.


Attention directed to 6:30, Hour One of Hardline show, January 26, 2020...

https://wben.radio.com/media/podcast...m-latest-audio

Spot on, Mark!

Three years in the making and the Dems have nothing, no reason to remove Trump from office.

Any integrity / credibility they had prior to the Ukraine call nonsense has been further diminished.

[mark blazejewski]

Perhaps it is because most of their candidates are Socialists offering only un-affordable, pie-in-the sky horseshiot to the voters, or are crooked schemers like Biden, but the Democrats seemingly have made President Trump's removal the "urgent" issue in this campaign.

In fact, Nate MacMurray was advocating the Trump Impeachment at least one year and three months before the Ukrainian issue was resultant from the Zelensky telephone conversation.

This was a post that MacMurray slapped on his Face Book page in April, 2019...

Nate McMurray for Congress

April 21, 2019

If you IMPEACH Trump, he will unravel. Stop fearing the backlash from people who already hate you. Grab that string. Pull.

https://www.facebook.com/nate.mcmurr...16929898319748

More recently, MacMurray likened Trump to a "dictator"...

"If we don't come out like this, his behavior becomes normalized. If we don't stand up and say it's not normal, they'll say it is normal," McMurray said. "Is this normal what we're going through right now? (Crowd: "No.") It's your duty, my duty, everyone's duty to get out and say, 'This ain't normal' or we're going to have a dictatorship."

https://news.wbfo.org/post/protester...ach-president*

If there is going to be a bold contrast between the candidates in the race for NY 27, I would hope that during the remainder of the campaign that Jacobs will draw a sharper distinction between MacMurray and himself regarding support for the President, rather than this weasel-worded crap:

If I understood Senator Jacobs' response correctly, he said that whatever Trump may have done "did not rise to the level of Impeachment."*https://wben.radio.com/media/podcast...m-latest-audio

[Lee Chowaniec]

Half of Americans say the Senate should vote to convict and remove President Trump from office, according to a new Fox News poll.

The survey, which was released Sunday and conducted as the Senate impeachment trial began in earnest, found that 50 percent of Americans think the Senate should vote to convict and remove Trump, while 44 percent believe the upper chamber should not vote to remove the president.

Opinions on impeachment and removal break strongly along partisan lines. Eighty-one percent of Democrats say Trump should be removed from office, while 84 percent of Republicans say he shouldn't. A majority of independent voters (53 percent) think Trump should be removed, while just 34 percent say he should not.

Comment

Still waiting to hear what crime was committed.

The poll indicates the vote to remove Trump is along party lines and split 50-50. Seems like public opinion is not strong enough to warrant removal – especially now that many Americans are tuning out of the Senate impeachment hearing. And, too often we have come to see how fair and reliable polls are.

As to the Dems demanding witnesses to testify (Bolton in particular), fine with me as long as the Republicans get the opportunity to have the Bidens and the ‘sham’ whistleblower to testify as well.

[mark blazejewski]

As to the Dems demanding witnesses to testify (Bolton in particular), fine with me as long as the Republicans get the opportunity to have the Bidens and the ‘sham’ whistleblower to testify as well.

Lee, after this rather convenient leak of information allegedly contained in the unpublished Bolton book, I am beginning to be open to the possibility that this longstanding coup effort is not really aimed at President Trump per se, nor is it an outgrowth of the strict Democrat Party/Left's reaction to his stunning election.

Rather, I am beginning to consider that it serves as the collective Deep State's warning to the American people that its ballots mean nothing; its elected officials are insignificant, and that the Constitution exists only to be manipulated by the Deep State in support of its wanton exercise of power.

If the possibility that I offer above is true, it suggests to me this Impeachment effort may be a case of the Deep State messaging the American voters "Don't even think of controlling us in the future; we are running the show, so shut-up and sit down!"

[OutsidetheBox]

Lee, after this rather convenient leak of information allegedly contained in the unpublished Bolton book, I am beginning to be open to the possibility that this longstanding coup effort is not really aimed at President Trump per se, nor is it an outgrowth of the strict Democrat Party/Left's reaction to his stunning election.

Rather, I am beginning to consider that it serves as the collective Deep State's warning to the American people that its ballots mean nothing; its elected officials are insignificant, and that the Constitution exists only to be manipulated by the Deep State in support of its wanton exercise of power.

If the possibility that I offer above is true, it suggests to me this Impeachment effort may be a case of the Deep State messaging the American voters "Don't even think of controlling us in the future; we are running the show, so shut-up and sit down!"

Or maybe, just maybe, there is no deep state and officials are now coming around to saying enough is enough. It's probably the simplest, and most logical, explanation that enough officials are growing tired of Trump's never ending questionable (and potentially illegal) policies and approaches. The man only cares about himself and money, he does not care about country. He is not the king of America, despite what he believes. I'm sure that is what he thought this would be since his only experience is being the head of his own company, where he can do whatever he pleases without consensus or dissent.

[mark blazejewski]

Or maybe, just maybe, there is no deep state and officials are now coming around to saying enough is enough. It's probably the simplest, and most logical, explanation that enough officials are growing tired of ...

That is a plausible, but an entirely speculative explanation, with which I entirely disagree.

...Trump's never ending questionable (and potentially illegal) policies and approaches. The man only cares about himself and money, he does not care about country.

I think you most probably meant to say "possibly" and not "potentially." In any event, those are your respected conclusions, which of course represent your singular opinion.

He is not the king of America, despite what he believes.

Kings usually inherit power through hereditary linage; President's are mandated power through a prescribed ballot process.

Having endured the primaries and general election campaign, IMHO, Trump knows his singular "reign" is limited to four fleeting years, and is not held with the permanence of a royal title, transferable to his designated heirs in perpetuity, as suggested by the Left wing academician Karlan.

I'm sure that is what he thought this would be since his only experience is being the head of his own company, where he can do whatever he pleases without consensus or dissent.

Again, your worthy opinion.

[Lee Chowaniec]

Or maybe, just maybe, there is no deep state and officials are now coming around to saying enough is enough. It's probably the simplest, and most logical, explanation that enough officials are growing tired of Trump's never ending questionable (and potentially illegal) policies and approaches. The man only cares about himself and money, he does not care about country. He is not the king of America, despite what he believes. I'm sure that is what he thought this would be since his only experience is being the head of his own company, where he can do whatever he pleases without consensus or dissent.

There is much evidence supporting a ‘deep state’ opinion.

Regardless, it is not all about individuals supporting Trump, but individuals wanting to let the sunshine in on all the miscreants – regardless of political party affiliation.

There should be witnesses and Senate trial testimony. I certainly do want to hear from Bolton, especially now after the Bolton book exposure. I would like to see Schifft and the Bidens subpoenaed and hear their testimony.

Are the Democrats any more moral or deserving than the Republicans in serving our best interests? Not in my opinion! This entire impeachment process in nothing more than dark political theater that is tearing our country apart.

Choosing a political party or a campaign candidate for many has been likened to ‘choosing the lesser of two evils’. I have come to look at it as ‘trying to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Favoring Trump today boils down to what is being offered in his stead – progressive socialism or Marxist socialism. **** choice for many of us, eh?

[mark blazejewski]

There should be witnesses and Senate trial testimony. I certainly do want to hear from Bolton, especially now after the Bolton book exposure. I would like to see Schifft and the Bidens subpoenaed and hear their testimony.

Lee, I am very inclined to agree with you.

A full blown trial with witnesses, verdicts, and the mantra of "The thrill of victory, and the agony of defeat" may just be the ticket to expose what I consider to be strong evidence of the presence of a "Deep State," and to restore these bureaucratic microbes to their proper functional role of service not sovereignty.

Also, such a full-blown trial just may relegate "Impeachment" to its intended, proper Constitutional role, and remove its commonality from the political campaign arsenal.

In point of fact, Trump himself said that he wants a full hearing.

In that connection, as I understand things, what is missing from the current Bolton narrative, is a bold media articulation of the subtle NY Times qualification which suggested that the Times had (and perhaps still has) no first-hand knowledge of the Bolton allegation as contained in the suggested unpublished manuscript; just more anonymous sources claiming to have had access to the text.

Ergo, I say, national security limitations permitting, bring on Bolton. A rigorous cross-examination may once again reflect a testimony that condemns with flimsy "presumptions" and exonerates with a failure to provide clear and unambiguous evidence of Presidential direction. Does the name Gordon Sondland come to mind?

Personally, I am confident if the public hears all of the witnesses, what will be exposed is a disgusting nest of tangled Deep State snakes; a cluster of arrogant, self-assertive, and un-elected bureaucratic vipers, that presume a ruling prerogative over those duly mandated to set and implement policy.

[Lee Chowaniec]

Acting more like children than children

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/w...e-boomer-rubes

Damn, some of us who dared to vote for Trump over Hillary in the 2016 election were labeled as deplorable, sexist, xenophobic, etc. Even labeled racist when we dared to question why Obama’s academic records were sealed. Now Trump supporters are being labeled by the biased media elite as ‘rural southern dummies’.

Ah, the party of tolerance, inclusion and civility. Elitists? I think not!

[mark blazejewski]

If you do not think that the Socialist Democrats in the House and Senate have no respect for Impeachment as originally intended and prescribed in* the Constitution, just look at what they think of the Constitution's original and fundamental concerns regarding the interests of the small states in the electoral process.

State legislatures holding 196 electoral votes have already "signed-on" to this proposal if it should become law.

This could happen if the Democrats take back the House, win the Senate, and defeat Trump...

https://brookline.wickedlocal.com/ne...citizen-corner

[mark blazejewski]

Now Trump supporters are being labeled by the biased media elite as ‘rural southern dummies’.

These two clods appear to be "rural southern dummies"...

[Lee Chowaniec]

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...nd_142240.html

Spot on as to content!

Written by Bill O’Reilly, disturbing.

[mark blazejewski]

Ah, the kindred Deep State players.

Former Trump Chief of Staff General Kelly says he unequivocally believes Bolton concerning Ukrainian issues.

I only know of rumors of an unpublished manuscript's alleged contents. Those rumors are attributed only to an anonymous source(s). So, what is it that Kelly is "believing," because I am not aware of any specific public Bolton assertion?

Sounds like Kelly, seemingly quite opportunistically, is preemptively supporting his Neo Con, Deep State brother, without regard to any known facts.

I will double down on this comment:

Ergo, I say, national security limitations permitting, bring on Bolton. A rigorous cross-examination may once again reflect a testimony that condemns with flimsy "presumptions" and exonerates with a failure to provide clear and unambiguous evidence of Presidential direction. Does the name Gordon Sondland come to mind?

Personally, I am confident if the public hears all of the witnesses, what will be exposed is a disgusting nest of tangled Deep State snakes; a cluster of arrogant, self-assertive, and un-elected bureaucratic vipers, that presume a ruling prerogative over those duly mandated to set and implement policy.