Trump asks if Democrats ‘love our country’ amid ongoing impeachment hearing

Trump asks if Democrats ‘love our country’ amid ongoing impeachment hearing

By: Brett Samuels

President Trump on Wednesday questioned whether Democrats love the country in light of the ongoing impeachment inquiry in the House.

The president tore into Democrats during a meeting with the Italian prime minister at a NATO gathering in London. The House Judiciary Committee was simultaneously holding a hearing in Washington on impeachable offenses with constitutional law experts as Trump spoke.

“These people, you almost question whether or not they love our country and that’s a very, very serious thing: Do they, in fact, love our country?” Trump asked, criticizing the timing of the hearing.

The president and his allies have expressed frustration over Democrats holding the hearing on the same day he is meeting with world leaders, accusing them of doing so purposely. There is no evidence the overlap was intentional.

“To do it on a day like this where we’re in London with some of the most powerful countries in the world having a very important NATO meeting, and it just happened to be scheduled … on this day, it’s really, honestly it’s a disgrace,” Trump said.

Trump bashed Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) — three of the Democrats leading the impeachment proceedings — as “losers” and predicted that many Democrats would vote against impeachment because of political consequences.

He reiterated his belief that the impeachment proceedings will benefit Republicans in the 2020 election, particularly in swing districts. Polling has shown voters are split on whether they support impeaching Trump, though support has dipped slightly among independents.

The House Intelligence Committee on Tuesday issued a report alleging Trump abused his office by pressuring Ukraine to investigate his domestic political rivals. Democrats accused the president of conditioning a White House visit for the Ukrainian president on a public announcement of those investigations.

The report alleges Trump “placed his personal political interests above the national interests of the United States, sought to undermine the integrity of the U.S. presidential election process, and endangered U.S. national security.”

The document serves as a roadmap for the House Judiciary Committee, which could draw up articles of impeachment against Trump in the coming weeks.

“I saw it and it’s a joke,” Trump told reporters when asked about the report, noting that Fox News personalities and “legal scholars” have dismissed the report.

Trump has defended his conduct with Ukraine, insisting his actions did not meet the threshold of high crimes and misdemeanors laid out in the Constitution.

“There was no crime whatsoever, not even a little tiny crime,” he said.


…”Stand beside her, and guide her, through the night with A light from above”…

National Security Will Trump any Impeachment Endgame

 

National Security Will Trump any Impeachment Endgame

Impeachment and Its Effects on National Security of America

By: Paul E. Vallely MG US Army (Ret)

December 2, 2019

The House impeachment inquiry is set to move into a new, more public phase in the coming weeks. President Trump’s impeachment defense strategy will prevail. President will be charting an unbeatable offensive strategy and ensuring the impeachment Endgame will fail. Some say that President Trump is swimming in uncharted waters as he may become the first president to seek reelection after being impeached. Don’t hold your breath.

The Deep State is the big story of our time. It is the red thread that runs through the war on terrorism and the militarization of our foreign policy, the CIA and DOJ. But these isolated cases have not provided a framework for understanding the extent of the shadow government, how it arose, the interactions of its various parts, and the extent to which it influences and controls the leaders whom we think we choose in elections.

If you don’t know what the Deep State is then, perhaps you are part of it. We know, of course, that the liberal Deep State that lurks within our government is and always has been hellbent on destroying President Trump and preventing him from making America great again. And we know for certain that Deep State weasels fabricated the whole Russia and Ukraine HOAX and myth.

There will be a reckoning- a reckoning of the Deep State and its operatives. A question has been proposed to me regarding the impact on US National Security as a result of the impeachment inquiry and proceedings. push by the Socialist Democrats and the media. Will foreign actors like China, Russia and Iran and the EU and others pursue actions detrimental to our National Security. How will US National Security be impacted and undermined by impeachment proceedings?

The President for weeks now has insisted there was nothing wrong with his July 25 call with Ukraine’s president and urged hesitant Republicans to defend him on the substance of the charges against him. The socialist Democrats (the likes of Schiff and Pelosi) are using the Ukraine issue as part of the rational to pursue impeachment. This will be unfounded in the weeks to come. These purveyors of impeachment really believe the Ukrainian issue threatens our national security and Constitution. Trump has signaled he is ready to dig in, even floating in an interview that he might read the transcript of his Ukraine call in a “fireside chat.” The President expressed confidence that the public aspect of the hearings would help his case.

First and foremost, National security is a corporate term covering both national defense and foreign relations of the U.S. It refers to the protection of a nation from attack or other danger by holding adequate armed forces and guarding state secrets. The most important role of the federal government is protecting our citizens from national security threats. This means creating a strong system for defense both at home and abroad. The United States should continue to act as a defender of freedom and a staunch supporter of our allies worldwide despite the internal, domestic infighting that is occurring. I assure you that President Trump will not falter in this battle and our national security will not be impacted.

Measures taken to ensure U.S. national security include:

Next Steps for U.S. Strategy

The President and his national security team are rightly focused on the essential issues, yet it is also clear that many of those challenges are far from resolved. There is a clear continued requirement for the application of all instruments of U.S. power. Further, the U.S. will continue to stretch itself in order to be actively and simultaneously engaged in all three core regions. In addition, many regional issues spill over into competition into other areas. For instance, the Arctic is a region of increasing competition with China and Russia. The U.S. is also concerned about destabilizing Chinese and Russian activity and interference in Africa and Latin America.

With these concerns in mind, the next iteration of U.S. strategy must address not only key regional initiatives but must ensure that critical instruments of American power are prepared to respond appropriately globally with sufficient scope and influence. Rebuild the “America First” US deterrence to preserve peace through strength must be our Nation’s top priority.

Stability of Key Regions. Addressing threats abroad helps the U.S. to avoid consequences at home. Promoting stability in critical regions prevents conflict there from cascading in ways that affect America. Stability abroad also provides for a free and secure global marketplace, which redounds to the benefit of Americans. Conversely, open warfare in areas where inter-state tensions are prominent—and the capability of adversaries the greatest—would have a major negative impact on the United States.

The U.S. must be present or have the capacity to project power to protect its interests worldwide. The U.S. is anything but the world’s policeman or a global babysitter. America must be prudent in the application of power. Three key regions link America to the world—Europe, the Middle East, Central and South America and the Indo–Pacific. These are also regions with a preponderance of U.S. friends, allies, and strategic partners with significant political, economic, and military power. Beyond

The Obama/Biden approach to handling world affairs and U.S. security during the eight years of their administration failed — with global terrorism, nuclear proliferation, and human suffering rising and global freedom retreating. Additionally, communist China increased its activities against the United States, and according to the CIA World Factbook, emerged as a strong global power.ps that the. should take. The research presented focuses on high-pay-off, feasible, and suitable U.S.s that will further the objectives of the NSS and improve national

It’s rather remarkable that Biden, who was the architect and champion of many of these failed foreign policies, would deign to label the incumbent U.S. President as an existential security threat when so many foreign policy calamities happened on his watch. President Trump won a free and fair presidential election by offering American voters a stark change in direction from the Obama/Biden globalist policies and the established D.C. national security and crony capitalist order. He promised to avoid unnecessary future wars, curb illegal immigration, have recalcitrant international allies pay their fair share for common defense, redo trade deals that harm American businesses and consumers, and serve as Free World leader in protecting American interests and people. It is how a constitutional republic should operate. And if President Trump poses an existential threat to anyone or anything it’s to the Obama/Biden way of doing things, not to U.S. national security.

The United States is a global power with global interests and global responsibilities. America needs a strategy to match. In particular, the government must safeguard the nation’s three top vital interests—defense of the homeland, stability in critical regions, and preservation of the right of states to freely transit the global commons. All three goals are best served by effective U.S. actions in three crucially important parts of the world—the Indo–Pacific, Europe, and the Middle East.

In December 2017, the Trump Administration released its National Security Strategy (NSS).

The strategy is well suited to the task of protecting the nation’s vital interests. Further, rather than just a document for public consumption, the Administration has sought to follow the strategy like a blueprint for keeping the U.S. free, safe, and prosperous in a changing and challenging world. The United States cannot eliminate every bad actor, right every wrong, or correct every perceived injustice in the world. That is impossible. But the United States can contribute to building a world order in which the rule of law, the integrity of national borders, democratic capitalism, freedom of the seas, democratic self-government, human rights, and international trade prevail, not as guaranteed outcomes but as opportunities.

MG Vallely is the Chairman of the Stand Up America Foundation and a contributing member of the War Room

…”Stand beside her, and guide her, through the night with A light from above”…

 

The DNC Caught in their Frame Up of Our Elected President

Devine: Democrats should eat a big serving of humble pie

By: Miranda Devine

It was ironic that Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland used the word “humble” to describe himself in his opening statement on the fourth day of public impeachment hearings.

This was a virtue he said his parents took care to instill in him, and kudos to him for recognizing its importance at least enough to mention it.

But humility is the one quality missing from this impeachment process and the one quality most essential to a functioning society.

Only a profound absence of humility on the part of the Democrats would have allowed them to follow up their three-year Russia-collusion failure with another shameless attempt to overturn the 2016 election for no reason other than that they are deranged with Trump hatred.

Humility would have caused a moment’s introspection after the Mueller probe flopped, remorse that lasting damage had been done to the nation on a pointless witch hunt, and a realization that what goes around comes around.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff and his boss, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, certainly affect an air of humility, stifling glee at the trouble they’re causing President Trump and pretending they are “prayerful.” But they fool no one.

Humility would have Schiff understand that when witness after witness testifies to nothing that amounts to impeachable evidence against the president, it’s time to fold the tent and admit you’ve failed.

On Wednesday, for example, Sondland was supposed to be Schiff’s smoking gun. But he was a dead duck by 10:20 a.m.

Schiff had promised that Sondland would confirm Trump had demanded military aid be withheld from Ukraine until President Volodymyr Zelensky committed to investigating Ukrainian meddling in our 2016 election and corruption at Ukrainian company Burisma, including dodgy dealings of the Biden family.

But when Schiff asserted that Trump wanted Ukraine to perform investigations “that would help his re-election campaign,” Sondland replied, “I can’t characterize why he wanted them.”

Over and over, Sondland disappointed: “I never heard from President Trump that aid was conditioned on an announcement of an investigation.”

“Trump never told me directly … He did not ever have a conversation with me about the aid.”

“When I asked him, ‘What do you want from Ukraine,’ he said, ‘I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo. Tell Zelinsky to do the right thing.’ ”

It was before noon and Trump knew he had won. On the South Lawn, before he jumped on Marine One, the president repeated Sondland’s words at a mocking press conference.

He knew Sondland’s testimony was a disaster for the Democratic project, not that you’d know it from Schiff’s triumphal bathroom break press conference, or the online headlines.

That’s what a lack of humility does: It destroys your judgment.

It also makes you pompous and preposterous, as Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman was Tuesday, another Democratic star who fizzled fast, despite his best efforts.

Vindman’s hubris was so great that he even chastised Republican ranking member Devin Nunes for addressing him as “Mr.” and not by his military title. The unnecessary act of dressing up in his uniform was another prideful act.

Vindman testified that he advised the Ukrainian administration to ignore the US president, and he overstated his importance in the chain of command, claiming he was the “principal adviser” to the president when he’d never even met him.

He admitted that he bypassed his boss to go straight to the lawyers with concerns that Trump’s July 25 phone call with Zelensky was “improper,” and he all but confirmed that it was he who tipped off the so-called whistleblower and set off the chain reaction that led to this impeachment hearing.

Vindman’s beef with Trump was that the president’s foreign policy was “undermining the consensus policy” of unelected bureaucrats like him.

The arrogance had to be seen to be believed, and yet people with no concept of humility fell over themselves to praise Vindman.

The corrosive absence of humility among Washington bureaucrats has been the hallmark of these hearings.

They “have never accepted President Trump as legitimate and resent his unorthodox style and his intrusion onto their ‘turf,’ ” said Republican Sen. Ron Johnson, chair of the Senate Subcommittee on Europe and Regional Security Cooperation, in a letter submitted to the inquiry.

“They react by leaking to the press and participating in the ongoing effort to sabotage his policies and, if possible, remove him from office. It is entirely possible that Vindman fits this profile.”

Johnson isn’t speaking through his hat. He is integral to this story as he went to Ukraine, met with Zelensky and saw Vindman and most of the other witnesses in action, and was not impressed.

“American foreign policy is what the president determines it to be, not what the ‘consensus’ on unelected foreign-policy bureaucrats wants it to be.”

That is humility and it used to be a hallmark of the Washington establishment, those grand personages who wore bow ties without irony, the restrained men and women who never sought to exceed their power, whose wisdom helped keep the republic on course.

Humility has been the mainstay of Christian societies, and central to the Protestant ethic of the American Midwest of the last century that fueled the greatest period of prosperity the world has ever seen.

Humility was the core value of people who created the moral capital for generations to come.

Humility was what made America great, and without it we are lost.

Mayor’s cycle of madness

The definition of madness is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. That’s Mayor Bill de Blasio in a nutshell.

After years of forcing the city to absorb unwanted bike lanes, which slow traffic, have done nothing to reduce cyclist fatalities or rule-breaking, and have probably contributed to a rise in pedestrian deaths, the mayor this week decided we need more of the same.

He signed a law requiring the Transportation Department to implement another 250 miles of protected bike lanes.

“All in a good day’s work,” he said.

Of course, de Blasio’s definition of “work” is different from most people’s. It’s the first time he’s signed anything since March because he’s been AWOL on his joke presidential bid.

But we were better off when he was goofing off.

Chick-fil-A chickens out

Now that Chick-fil-A has capitulated to the bullying of rainbow activists, it will learn that cowardice is a lose-lose proposition.

The chicken chain’s profits soared in the seven years since it was targeted over its boss’ comments opposing same-sex marriage. Its sales reportedly rose 12 percent, not because chicken lovers are homophobic but because no one likes a bully telling you what to believe.

Now the company has gone woke by announcing it won’t be “financially supporting anti-LGBTQ organizations,” which apparently means the Salvation Army and other Christian outfits with a traditional view of marriage.

Catholic writer Rod Dreher has a word for these craven chicken surrender merchants: “Cluckservatives.”

Article

Silent Coup: The Frame Up of An Elected President

Article

 …Stand beside her, and guide her, through the night with A light from above”…

Wow! The Entire State of Ohio…

 

Invasion USA Operations Plan

Ohio officials seize 40 pounds of fentanyl, an amount close to ‘chemical warfare’

 

A drug task force in Ohio seized more than 40 pounds of fentanyl — an amount akin to “chemical warfare” that could kill every person in the state, authorities said.

The suspected fentanyl — a powerful, synthetic opioid that’s up to 100 times more potent than morphine — was seized last late month along with 3 pounds of methamphetamine, a pound of heroin, three guns and more than $30,000 in cash, Ohio’s Regional Agencies Narcotics & Gun Enforcement Task Force announced Tuesday.

“The quantity of fentanyl in this case amounts to chemical warfare and a weapon of mass destruction,” Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost said. “I applaud the work of our task force and our law enforcement partners — this is an enormous amount of deadly drugs that will no longer be on our streets.”

Vance Callender, Homeland Security Investigations’ special agent in charge for Michigan and Ohio, said the seized fentanyl alone is “enough to kill the entire population” of the Buckeye State — roughly 11.69 million people as of last year — many times over.

Three men from Dayton were charged in the investigation and are facing charges including possession with intent to distribute 400 or more grams of fentanyl and possession of a firearm as a felon, authorities said.

The suspects were identified as Shamar Davis, 31, Anthony Franklin, 30, and Grady Jackson, 37.

“These illegal drugs ruin lives, destroy families, fuels violence, drives up property crime, and wrecks neighborhoods,” Montgomery County Sheriff Rob Streck said. “Anyone associated with it — especially those who sell and traffic it — are doing violence to people and causing harm in our communities.”

Fentanyl is often mixed with heroin or cocaine without the user’s knowledge, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

But a government report released last month found that meth is actually the bigger killer, despite fentanyl driving up drug overdoses in the United States overall. In 2017, meth was the drug most frequently involved in deaths in 19 states west of the Mississippi, according to the data.

Article

 

Recognition of Reality by MG Paul E. Vallely, U.S. Army (ret.)

Editor’s Note: While the DNC engages in sabotage and treason to cover for The Deep State within our government agencies…As it was before 9 11 in “protest of an election” to add delay…The sabotage of the White House computers by Clinton staffers…The Aviation Security Agent’s report and warning concerning Logan Airport…what was the D.I.A. investigating and what personnel records were involved within that side of The Pentagon… and much more…History repeats itself.


“Recognition of Reality”

By: MG Paul E Vallely, US Army (Ret)

November 1, 2019

 

 

Several years ago, I had the opportunity to co-chair a delegation to Cairo, Egypt to meet with General El-Sisi and his staff regarding the removal of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Morsi from office of the President. The first revolution was the removal of President Mubarak and the second revolution being the removal of Morsi. It was a tumultuous time in Egypt with a failing economy, chaos throughout the country, and a future election to elect a new President. As it turned out, General El-Sisi was elected the new President and formed a new government.

During our conference with the General Officer staff, El-Sisi and the Generals on his staff expressed that they were quite disturbed and upset with the United States, Obama, and Congress, for denying military aid and supplies to Egypt for overthrowing Morsi. General El-Sisi turned to me in his office and said, very emphatically, why does America and its political leaders always make their decisions looking through a “political prism” and not through a “reality prism”? I thought about his statement and I said to myself, yes, we do that in the US. We tend in Washington to make all our decisions through, particularly Congress, in a partisan, political way. El- Sisi said, “I cannot function that way as I have to look at the reality of our region: troubled countries like Libya to our west, Somalia to our south, the Suez Canal, the Sinai.” Well, it was a renaissance moment for me as I pondered and came to the realization, if you analyze and solve a countries issues, the country is best served by solving its problems by looking through a “reality prism” and not attempt to solve its problems through a dreaded “political prism” that tends to distort the issues and come to no logical conclusions.

Definition of reality:

 

“Reality is the sum or aggregate of all that is real or existent, as opposed to that which is only imaginary. The term is also used to refer to the ontological status of things, indicating their existence. In physical terms, reality is the totality of the universe, known and unknown. Philosophical questions about the nature of reality or existence or being are considered under the rubric of ontology, which is a major branch of metaphysics in the Western philosophical tradition. Ontological questions also feature in diverse branches of philosophy, including the philosophy of science, philosophy of religion, philosophy of mathematics, and philosophical logic. These include questions about whether only physical objects are real (i.e., Physicalism), whether reality is fundamentally immaterial (e.g., Idealism), whether hypothetical unobservable entities posited by scientific theories exist, whether God exists, whether numbers and other abstract objects exist, and whether possible worlds exist. the world or the state of things as they exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them.”

 

Well, then,  what do the citizens of the United States do about this dilemma and the system of governing by our partisan, elected, political leaders and how do we as a country start solving our problems based on reality and not partisan politics?

Rise of Partisan Politics

Even during George Washington’s first administration it was evident that partisan factions had emerged within the cabinet as well as within the country at large. The forces favoring a strong federal government were led by Alexander Hamilton and would become known as the Federalist Party. The advocates of strong state governments were led by Thomas Jefferson and became known as the Jeffersonian Republicans.

There is no unbroken descent from the early political factions to today’s parties. Hamilton would no doubt be attracted to the pro-business inclinations of the current Republican Party, but his preference for direct government intervention in the economy would fit better with the Democrats. Similarly, Jefferson’s emphasis on individual rights would be welcomed by today’s Democrats, but his insistence on a small federal government would be viewed today as a Republican concept.

In the United States, the meaning of the term “partisan” has changed dramatically over the last 60 years. Before the American National Election Study (described in Angus Campbell et al., in The American Voter) began in 1952, an individual’s partisan tendencies were typically determined from their voting behavior. Since then, “partisan” has come to refer to an individual with a psychological identification with one or the other of the major parties. Candidates, depending on their political beliefs, may choose to join a party. As they build the framework for career advancement, parties are more often than not the preferred choice for candidates. Wherein there are many parties in a system, candidates often join them as opposed to standing as an Independent, if that is provided for.

In the U.S., politicians have generally been identified with a party. Many local elections in the U.S. (as for mayor) are “nonpartisan.” A candidate may have a party affiliation, but it is not listed on the ballot. Independents occasionally appear in major contests but rarely win.

President Dwight D. Eisenhower was nonpartisan until 1952, when he joined the Republican Party and was elected president. According to David A. Crockett, “Much of Eisenhower’s nonpartisan image was genuine, for he found Truman’s campaigning distasteful and inappropriate, and he disliked the partisan aspects of campaigning.”[1] With little interest in routine partisanship, Eisenhower left much of the building and sustaining of the Republican Party to his vice president, Richard Nixon.[2] With Eisenhower uninvolved in party building, Nixon became the de facto national GOP leader.”[3]

Eisenhower’s largely nonpartisan stance allowed him to work smoothly with the Democratic leaders Speaker Sam Rayburn in the House, and Majority Leader Lyndon Johnson in the Senate.

Jean Smith says that:

“Disagreement among Republican and Democratic voters on a range of political issues has risen sharply in recent years, a political divide that intensified during the first year of President Trump’s administration, according to a new report from the Pew Research Center.”

“The divisions between Republicans and Democrats on fundamental political values—on government, race, immigration, national security, environmental protection, and other areas—reached record levels during Barack Obama’s presidency,” Pew’s report states. “In Donald Trump’s first year as president, these gaps have grown even larger.”

Since the widening of the partisan opinion gap is a continuation of a trend, Trump’s presidency hasn’t ushered in a new era of intense political polarization so much as it marks a new chapter in an increasingly polarized political time. Public opinion remains more divided along partisan lines than along the lines of race, religion, age, gender, and educational background, Pew finds.

As the country’s partisan divide has increased in recent years, hostility between Republicans and Democrats has remained high. Perhaps surprisingly, Pew’s data shows a slight decline in the share of Democrats and Republicans who say they have a “very unfavorable” view of the opposing party relative to one year ago. Overall, though, the numbers don’t represent a major change, and aren’t enough on their own to say that partisan hostilities are lessening. The vast majority of Republicans and Democrats, at 81 percent for both parties, say they have an unfavorable view of the other side.

 

Released and distributed by: The Stand Up America US Foundation.