Trump and Zelenskyy (r)An airman attached to the 436th Aerial Port Squadron loads cargo during a Ukraine security assistance mission at Dover Air Force Base, Del., Jan. 13, 2023. (photo: DOD)
During the scare over secondhand smoke, and the flurry of smoking bans in public spaces, 60,000 annual deaths from it was frequently cited. Actually, numbers varied from 20,000 to 120,000. When it came down to it, they were numbers pulled out of a hat. Once repeated, they had a life of their own. President Trump does it too.
In yesterday’s Truth Social post, Trump blithely threw out $350 billion in aid to Ukraine. Where did the number come from? Further, where’s the source for “half of the money we sent him is ‘MISSING’”? Not the Inspector General for Ukraine Aid, not the Center for Strategic and International Studies (see #2), not the Kiel Institute which studies international aid to Ukraine. You might counter that he’s president and therefore he must know. That’s not proof; that’s an act of faith.
Going back to the U.S. inspector general of “Ukraine Oversight”, $183 billion was promised and $86.7 billion delivered (see #3). The denizens of the far-Right fever swamps have mentioned $100 billion “missing”, stolen, wasted. Applying the two known numbers, ones that can be sourced, the $100 billion is roughly the difference between what was promised and given. If true, possibly, $100 billion is “missing” because it was never delivered.
President Zelensky in an AP interview of early February cited $177 billion earmarked by the U.S. but only $75 billion sent (see #4). These might be the numbers used in a Kiel Institute study (see #5). The point is that these numbers can be sourced. Where did President Trump’s numbers originate? No source is available, leaving one to entertain the option of them bursting from DJT’s imagination, a frequent occurrence.
I suspect that the press gaggle comment from Tuesday – “You should have never started it” – and the Truth Social rant of Wednesday are connected. In the one, President Trump put his foot in his mouth, up to the ankle, and halfway down the throat. Then, he tried to repair the damage by bloviating with more inanities.
Trump doesn’t understand the first rule of holes. Stop digging!
RogerG
Sources:
1. Thanks to Jim Geraghty for the numbers and sources at “Get Ukraine into the European Union”, National Review, 2/21/2025, at https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/get-ukraine-into-the-european-union/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=hero&utm_content=related&utm_term=first
2. “Where Is the Missing $100 Billion in U.S. Aid for Ukraine?”, Mark F. Cancian, CSIS, 2/11/2025, at https://www.csis.org/analysis/where-missing-100-billion-us-aid-ukraine
3. “Funding”, Ukraine Oversight: Special Inspector General for Operation Atlantic Resolve, Promoting Whole of Government Oversight of the U.S. Ukraine Response; at https://www.ukraineoversight.gov/Funding/#:~:text=Fiscal%20Year%20(FY)%202022%2D,obligated%20and%20%2486.7%20billion%20disbursed.
4. AP interview of President Zelensky, “Zelenskyy: Ukraine received US$76 billion out of US$177 billion approved by America”, 2/2/2025, Reddit, at https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/1igjyyl/zelenskyy_ukraine_received_us76_billion_out_of/
5. “Ukraine Support Tracker Data”, Antezza, A., et al, Kiel Institute for the World Economy, 2/20/2025, at https://www.ifw-kiel.de/publications/ukraine-support-tracker-data-20758/
Donald Trump is proof that no person is deserving of worship. Sooner or later, given enough time and opportunity, we’ll step in it. Trump is no different. The guy must have slept during his high school History classes. College wasn’t any better for him. Read this screed on Truth Social about Ukraine’s Zelenksyy. It’s mind-bogglingly stupid.
“Think of it, a modestly successful comedian, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, talked the United States of America into spending $350 Billion Dollars, to go into a War that couldn’t be won, that never had to start, but a War that he, without the U.S. and ‘TRUMP,’ will never be able to settle. The United States has spent $200 Billion Dollars more than Europe, and Europe’s money is guaranteed, while the United States will get nothing back. Why didn’t Sleepy Joe Biden demand Equalization, in that this War is far more important to Europe than it is to us — We have a big, beautiful Ocean as separation. On top of this, Zelenskyy admits that half of the money we sent him is ‘MISSING.’ He refuses to have Elections, is very low in Ukrainian Polls, and the only thing he was good at was playing Biden “like a fiddle.” A Dictator without Elections, Zelenskyy better move fast or he is not going to have a Country left. In the meantime, we are successfully negotiating an end to the War with Russia, something all admit only “TRUMP,” and the Trump Administration, can do. Biden never tried, Europe has failed to bring Peace, and Zelenskyy probably wants to keep the “gravy train” going. I love Ukraine, but Zelenskyy has done a terrible job, his Country is shattered, and MILLIONS have unnecessarily died – And so it continues…..”
Trump is showing that Zelensky isn’t the problem. He is! For Trump enthusiasts, drop the cultic priestly vestments and get off your knees on your prayer rugs long enough to parse the words of a nincompoop. And to think that this guy is the leader of the Free World. Amazing.
Sentence #1 is incoherent, the rantings of adolescent rationalizations. Is this genius making the case that the $350 billion should never have been spent, or that the war never had to start? Yeah, it wouldn’t have started if Putin hadn’t invaded, and without American support naked aggression would have been rewarded. Strip away the crass, ego-inflating bloviation about himself being the block to all bad things in the world, and what remains is the reality after his loss in the 2020 election. It’s 2025, not January 2021. Now, what are you going to do? Sell out the victim?
Sentence #2 is more evidence of an all-too-human businessman rampaging way outside his lane. This blinkered person behind the Resolute desk reduced all thought and considerations in foreign relations to dollars and cents. It’s the only thing he understands, or thinks he understands. By his convoluted logic, we would have remained a part of the British empire; the South would be represented in the UN as the CSA; a good portion of France, Belgium, and Russia would be part of the German Empire under the Hohenzollerns; and much of Europe and Asia would be Axis satraps. Geostrategy is reduced to an accounting ledger. It’s stupid beyond belief.
Sentence #3 is more pablum. The idiocy is crowned with “Equalization” and “a beautiful Ocean as separation”. Yeah, Europe should pay more, but that’s not as if we shouldn’t pay anything. And that’s not to mean that Europe hasn’t contributed anything – $120 billion from 2022 to 2024 (see #1). Besides, are we going to lead as the USA or hide behind an ocean? Jihadi goat-herders with box cutters on 9/11 proved that an ocean is only a geographical feature to be crossed to get at the Great Satan. DJT, this is not the age of sail anymore.
Sentence #4 is proof that Ukraine is as flawed as DJT during his bankruptcies, or DOGE is discovering that we are. But we shouldn’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Account for the aid, and keep it flowing. Don’t use it as an excuse to reward a thug.
Sentences #5 and #6 are evidence of Trump showing his capacity to fill the shoes of Izvestia, the newspaper organ of the old Supreme Soviet. They promiscuously applied “dictator” to Thatcher and Reagan. Trump repeats the same style of slander. Trump has lost his mind. Zelensky is more answerable to an electorate than Putin. Putin offs his opponents, both inside and outside Russia. From the streets of London to the presidential residence in Kyiv to outside the Kremlin, he has horrifically poisoned, disfigured, and assassinated opposition. The list is growing. Those surviving disappear in a reconstituted Gulag Archipelago. Trump adds his name to the long list of dictator-lovers going back to the Stalin-apologists of yesteryear. It’s as shameful today as it was then.
The rest is an embarrassment to adult reasoning. “I love Ukraine”, but only if it surrenders to Putin. You see, following the Trump thought-stream, Ukraine is ravaged by . . . Zelensky, by Ukraine itself, not Putin. In Trump’s twisted brain, Zelensky should have surrendered earlier. Thus, it’s his fault. A thug that invaded the country across three fronts without warning or provocation, in a typically mismanaged Russian blitzkrieg, is not to blame. The thinking provokes disbelief. And he is our president. Whew, what a mess.
There is a crazy Right, and Trump is their messiah. He is deified. Everything he says and writes is worshipped as holy script. I’m surprised that they aren’t printed in red. Watch as longstanding pundits of the Right eat their past words. Watch as they morph from Kremlin skeptics to Putin apologists in the span of a short decade, because their god says so.
One question for Hugh Hewitt: What happened to Mike Pompeo? He’s gone into your memory hole. At one time praised to high heaven; now, nothing. He seems to have descended into nothingness like Bill Barr, John Bolton, and anyone who will not make the appropriate sacrifices at the altar.
Hugh Hewitt at the mic of his radio show.
Please, people on the Right, get off your prayer rugs long enough to notice that your Prophet wears no clothes. Reality is uglier than your illusions.
RogerG
Sources:
1. An assessment of European contributions to the defense of Ukraine can be found at “Ranking of European countries by aid provided to Ukraine between January 2022 and August 2024, by type of aid”, Statista, 10/29/2024, at https://www.statista.com/statistics/1499394/european-aid-to-ukraine-by-country/
British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain (left) and German Fuehrer Adolf Hitler shake hands in this composite photograph at the 1938 Munich Conference in which Chamberlain agreed to allow Nazi Germany to annex the Sudetenland. (photo: The Daily Mail)Presidents Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin shake hands at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation leaders’ summit in Da Nang, Vietnam, 2017.
The prophet Jeremiah warned the people of Jerusalem of their impending doom, and included an admonishment that rings through the ages.
“From the least to the greatest,
All [people of Jerusalem] are greedy for gain;
prophets and priests alike,
all practice deceit.
They dress the wound of my people
as though it were not serious.
‘Peace, peace,’ they say,
when there is no peace.”
(Jeremiah 6:13-14)
Then, here’s President Trump at Mar-A-Lago on Tuesday (2/18): “Today I heard [from Ukraine], ‘Oh, well, we weren’t invited.’ Well, you’ve been there for three years. You should have never started it. You could have made a deal.” (See #1) “You should have never started it.” What?!! A slip of the tongue? I didn’t realize that it was Ukraine that invaded Russia. The inverted logic is absolutely dumfounding, stunning.
It’s the logic of a businessman, not a statesman, who is practiced at cutting deals in the good ol’ USA, in the protective cradle of our rule of law. Deals in business frequently aren’t moral matters. Both sides make proposals and meet in the middle. In the arena of international relations, there is no rule of law, despite what Geneva and the ICC have to say about it. So, President Trump treats the bloody aggressor as the moral equivalent of the bloodied victim. It’s beyond foolish; it’s stupid; it’s dangerous.
“‘Peace, peace,’ they say, when there is no peace.” Is a real and enduring peace a possibility under this mental deformity? “Peace” becomes the pause between the hungry wolf and the sheep with nowhere to run.
Peace, at this juncture, occurs without moral judgment. “Peace” merely becomes the bridge of moral equivalence between evil and innocence. The wolf is still hungry. Into the fray of the Ukraine War has entered President Trump and his people. Shuttle diplomacy is commencing between the wolf and his dinner. Separate meetings with Putin’s people are taking place in Saudi Arabia, then the scene will shift to Ukraine’s Zelensky. Trump’s negotiators are the “honest broker” between the wolf and his victim. This isn’t the first time for these purveyors of a morally monstrous “peace”. History lends many examples, and the results are disturbing, as usual.
It’s the kind of “peace” strictly defined as an absence of war, till the next time. Appeasement is the means to achieve a “peace” that does not deter, that does not matter. It was tried numerous times in the ancient world, such as during the campaign of Philip II of Macedon to unite the Greece under his rule (in the 350s to 330s BC), much like Putin’s ambition to reconstitute the Soviet empire. After the Battle of Crocus Field (352 BC), Athenians negotiated the Peace of Philocrates with Philip which made Athens a Macedonian ally and relinquished territory to him. The “peace” ended in 338 BC in the last-ditch Battle of Chaeronea and Philip’s final subjugation of Greece.
Moving forward in time to the late 20th century, a form of appeasement with no real “peace” came out of the Vietnam War’s Paris Peace Accords of January 1973, negotiated by Nixon and Kissinger. The result was a withdrawal of U.S. forces without a commensurate one for North Vietnamese forces in the South. Within two years, the communist North conquered the South and the red flag of the hammer and sickle flew over Southeast Asia.
The approach of Nixon and Kissinger in 1973 is eerily similar to Trump’s. In Trump’s Doha Accords of 2020 with the Taliban, the Afghan government had no direct involvement. Nixon and Kissinger were agreeable to freezing South Vietnam out of the talks as were Trump’s people the Afghan government. In both cases, the victims were “consulted”, and they even protested, but the U.S. decided their fate in isolated talks with their enemies. The U.S. agreed to a withdrawal from Afghanistan of our and NATO forces as well as restrictions on air strikes in support of our Afghan allies. In an Afghan army trained in the tactics of American combined arms, the hampering of air support would prove dispiriting and catastrophic.
Trump gave us the opportunity to relive ’75 Saigon. Biden carried it out, only this time it was Kabul. Biden crammed down Afghan throats Trump’s Peace of Doha like he jammed eco-fanaticism, transgenderism, and floods of illegal immigrants down our throats.
It happened to South Vietnam and Afghanistan, so what lies in store for Ukraine? The common ingredient is an antsy eagerness to leave which sets the stage for abandonment. I saved the most egregious example of disgrace for last.
The 1938 Munich agreement with Herr Hitler, der Fuhrer, screams at us. “Munich”, like “Hitler”, is worn from overuse. That doesn’t mean that it isn’t relevant when the parallels are too numerous to ignore. Let’s see, in 1938 Czechoslovakia was the next dish in Hitler’s buffet after the shredding of the Versailles Treaty, rearmament, the Rhineland, and the Anschluss. Next is defeat of the West and Lebensraum (living space in the East) and the immortal Third Reich.
Conquest is Putin’s forte as well. He gained power in 1999 and soon launched the Second Chechen War over Dagestan. He leveled Grozny like Hitler did Warsaw. An independent Chechnya is no more. And soon to follow was Georgia in 2008. Reaching deeper into the North Caucasus, he ripped off a couple of provinces. All this sets the stage for Ukraine in much the same manner as Hitler eyed Czechoslovakia. 1935-9 parallels 2014-present.
For both Hitler and Putin, expansion is the goal, but standing in the way are the victim and her allies. These allies, however, had their valor stripped by previous wars. They were anxious to cut a deal in Trump’s Art of the Deal. Britian’s Chamberlain and France’s Daladier joined Hitler and Mussolini at Munich to construct “peace with honor”. Czechoslovakia’s friends were much more eager for a deal (remember Trump’s Art of the Deal) than either the Czechs and Slovaks, and the wolf. Without support and now isolated, the victim was forced to accept the dismemberment of their country with the loss of the country’s defenses abutting the lair of the wolf, the mountainous Sudetenland. Soon after marching into the Sudetenland, by March of 1939, the wolf had the whole enchilada. No more Czechoslovakia.
Standing athwart Putin is the U.S. and NATO, and the moxie of the Ukrainians. America’s Chamberlain, Donald Trump, has sent his reps to Saudi Arabia to cut a deal (remember the Art of the Deal), absent the Ukrainians. Picture this: the bloody seizure of Crimea, followed by the Donbas, with the aid of proxies (like Hitler used Konrad Henlein and his Sudeten German Party), and then a full-scale invasion.
Putin reads history books. Trump rereads his Art of the Deal.
“You should have never started it.” Can you believe that it came out of the mouth of a U.S. president? Trump has a problem distinguishing the rapist from the victim. The U.S. met three rapes of the same victim with relative passivity and only decided to provide real assistance after the serial rapist tried to seize every inch of the woman’s body for his own. In steps Trump with a counteroffer: we’ll allow you to take an arm and six toes. After all, it’s the Art of the Deal, and the two sides meeting in the middle. It’s beyond disreputable. It’s disgusting.
In one final note, Putin cheerleaders on the Right bellow that they’re tired of the war. Tired? Not one drop of American blood has fallen in Ukraine. These mental midgets can’t be referring to American body bags. There aren’t any. The victim is only asking for the guns to stop the attack. In Trump’s twisted universe, the girl is at fault for exposing too much skin in her prom dress. How else can you get to, “You should have never started it”?
This is shameful, shameful, but it’s not as if we haven’t been here before.
RogerG
Sources:
1. “’You should have never started it’: Trump seems to blame Kyiv for war”, Reuters, 2/19/2025, at https://www.yahoo.com/news/never-started-trump-seems-blame-075955974.html
2. A summary of Putin’s history of aggression can be read at “Vladimir Putin’s history of conflict with former Soviet nations: the timeline and human cost”, Stacker, 2/19/2025, at https://stacker.com/stories/world/vladimir-putins-history-conflict-former-soviet-nations-timeline-and-human-cost
The U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 3:
“. . . he [President] shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed . . . .”
The U.S. Constitution, 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 Misdemeanors.”
Presidential Oath of Office:
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
Drone photo of crowds of illegal immigrants at the International Bridge on the southern border in Texas, Sept. 16, 2021.President Biden after signing a stack of executive orders shortly after taking office to reverse many of Trump’s actions.
Yes, but he won’t be.
How to rein in the President when occupants from both parties, but particularly the donkey party, have overstepped and shirked their legal responsibilities? Do we have to wait four years to correct the abuse?
Well, no. Impeachment stands at the ready. The Democrats tried it twice in Trump’s one term. They may have debased its utility by frivolous and failed overuse. Yet, it has become commonplace for federal officers throughout the three branches to egregiously overstep their powers while flagrantly ignoring their clear constitutional responsibilities. Most recently, President Biden refuses to enforce the immigration laws. He has, by execute order(s), simply repealed enforcement of the border. That’s a dereliction of a clear compulsory-in-law duty.
Could it qualify as a “high crime” when an elected officer grievously neglects his or her lawfully required responsibility? Biden’s executive orders are a clear violation of the oath of office to “faithfully execute” the constitutional position. You can’t “faithfully execute” if you refuse to do your job. You’re willfully derelict. Willful, persistent dereliction is a willful, persistent violation of the Constitution. “High crime” anyone?
The scenes at the southern border are gut-wrenching for all the people allured by illegal presidential promises to not enforce the law. The human tidal waves passing through without paying heed to legal strictures, while enabling passage throughout the country of said violators, is tantamount to presidential complicity in crimes. This isn’t an indictment based on a phone call or overheated rhetoric at a rally. It is a shredding of the oath and Constitution. What can be a more serious “high crime” than to blatantly violate the highest law?
The donkey party’s abettors of the behavior will try to hang their hat on “prosecutorial discretion”. Where’s the discretion? Is it “discretion” to take an entire class of law and pretend it doesn’t exist? Not only that, but to assist in the violation of the laws? Hardly. It’s the practice of euphemism to provide cover for criminal conduct. “Prosecutorial discretion” turns a bank robbery into an “unauthorized withdrawal”.
It’s time to rethink our obese federal Leviathan. The level of government headquartered in DC has been unhinged from Constitutional moorings for quite some time. Impeachment might be one useful tool to once again align the branches within the bounds of our charter – i.e., return them to legal status.
However, I’m under no illusion that anybody in either party has the stomach for such medicine. We’ll, as before, muddle along and be content with the results of an electorate equally as unhinged as the people they elect. And surveys will continue, as before, to show deep disenchantment with the people they choose.
Pogo in Walt Kelly’s comic strip famously said in 1970, “We have met the enemy and he is us.” Kelly meant the statement for the plague of pollution. He’d probably be surprised to learn that Pogo’s quip has a much more robust application.
Elizabeth Warren is trying to right her sinking ship of a presidential campaign by appealing to the crazy left base of the Democratic Party with more and more outrageous utterances. Last Thursday (Jan. 30), she submitted a question in the impeachment trial by attacking the character of the Chief Justice, the presiding officer in the Senate trial. She basically accused him of being a shill for the president and Republicans. Watch the Chief Justice in a multi-second stare at the senator.
This not the way to “How to Win Friends and Influence People” (Dale Carnegie, 1936) . She would do well to get the book and read it. Under “Fundamental Techniques in Handling People”: #1, “Don’t criticize, condemn, or complain.”
Previously, she belittled the office of Secretary of Education by notifying the world that a “trans” child would make the choice if she wins the presidency. What?! Is she showing how far she will go to shamelessly humiliate herself at the altar of woke patronization. At what point is the word “despicable” appropriate in describing a politician?
In previous posts I explained the craziness of the Democrats’ impeachment jihad against Pres. Trump. This post is a continuation of the series which exhibits the Dems’ near complete divorce from law and logic.
I regularly listen to only one talk show, The Hugh Hewitt Show. I listen only sporadically to the others, if not at all. This segment of Friday’s show is an interview with Dr. Matthew Spalding of Hillsdale College’s Kirby Center in Washington, DC. If you have 21 minutes, listen to Spalding’s assessment of the impeachment proceedings so far. He raises some interesting points far removed from the confirmation-bias gabfest on the cable shows and left-of-center networks (which means all of them).
Two historical references in the conversation are intriguing. First, the Democrats’ claim that Trump is especially egregious in the use of presidential powers for political gain is undermined by … history. Lincoln ordered Sherman to send his Indiana troops home to vote, all this during a catastrophic civil war. Interesting. Second, Adam Schiff butchers the context of Hamilton’s letter to Washington. Hamilton was defending Washington from his critics not, as Schiiff asserts, warning Washington from becoming an autocrat. The letter mentions the dangers to Washington of popular demagogues “riding the whirlwind” … people like Schiff, Nadler, Pelosi, and the rest of the Resistance barkers. The Dems are so desperate to remove Trump that they are more willing to resemble skilled contortionists than mature statesmen.
One of the biggest dangers of this current impeachment affair is the danger of impeachment’s regular use as a tool of political bickering, something I have been warning about for weeks. In the end, here we are.
Republicans jot this down: the next time a Democrat president invents by presidential decree whole new categories of immigrants to be exempt from legal sanction, as Obama did in 2014 with merely his “pen and phone”, please move to expel that person from office.
Jerrold Nadler (D, NY), one of the House Impeachment Managers
Chutzpah increases with the intensity of the longing for power. Case in point: Jerry Nadler, House Impeachment Manager. Yesterday, Nadler cherry-picked a couple of quips from Professor Jonathan Turley’s testimony before Schiif’s committee and other statements to justify his jihad. So out of context was Nadler’s claims that it borders on perjury if he was a witness on the stand.
First, let’s hear from Nadler. Yesterday, he said that Turley “agreed that the articles charged an offense that is impeachable.” Then he quoted Turley as saying “it is possible to establish a case for impeachment based on a noncriminal allegation of abuse of power.” The only problem is that Turley’s full testimony is a censure of the Democrats’ impeachment crusade. Nadler’s desperation to remove Trump from office causes him to mangle reason and fact.
Next, let’s hear from Turley himself in his testimony before Schiff’s committee. Listen for yourself below. According to Turley, the offenses are impeachable … if proven. The only problem is that there is a “paucity of evidence and abundance of anger”. He said, “This is one of the thinnest records on impeachment to go forward.” Once again, turning to the possibility of noncriminal impeachable offenses, Turley agrees to the possibility … but this ain’t it! That was the entire thrust of his testimony.
Does this sound like Turley is ready to write the Democrats’ impeachment brief?
As Lincoln once said, “God cannot be for and against the same thing at the same time.” And that also applies to you, Jerry Nadler, and to the record of Turley’s testimony.
Impeachment manager Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., speaks in support of an amendment offered by Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., during the impeachment trial against President Donald Trump in the Senate at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, Tuesday, Jan. 21, 2020.
Well, the impeachment trial of Donald J. Trump has begun … and the title says it all. The Dems are feverishly working to turn an unimpeachable action into an impeachable one. They are twisting themselves into pretzels in the attempt.
If you just look at the guts of the accusations, there’s nothing to hang your hat on. The evidence doesn’t only lend itself to Schiff’s wild political imagination. The cry of a threat to national security is gibberish. If Trump’s delay of the giving of lethal aid to Ukraine posed such an existential danger to the US, what do you make of Obama’s boycott of the same lethal aid? The infamous phone call isn’t clear cut. It’s as rambling as Trump’s on-stage performances at his rallies. Witnesses say that they “felt” there was a “quid pro quo” as others aren’t quite sure. Besides, even if there was, the Democrats are only mad that there wasn’t Hillary in office to resurrect the IRS as an arm of the Democratic Party. Don’t you get the feeling that this is just a sham?
The impeachment mess is another example of the unrestrained “will to power”. Anything, literally anything, is considered just and proper in the pursuit of power. The Dems have ample company in the 20th century’s long list of utopia-mongers. Beware, you Democrats, the French Revolution’s Jacobin Reign of Terror ended when their guillotine was turned on them.
The Death of Robespierre, who was guillotined in Paris, July 28,1794.
I wish for a return of calm, adult reason … if that is possible.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), speaks about the the Senate Impeachment trial at the Capitol, January 16, 2020, in Washington, DC. (Photo by OLIVIER DOULIERY/AFP)
Axios quotes Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer as tweeting, “Trials have witnesses and documents. Cover-ups don’t.” Yes, they do, Chuck, if the prosecution brings them as part of their charges, and they must be disclosed. It’s called “discovery”: the 6th Amendment right of the accused “to be confronted with the witnesses against him”. Shoddy charges leads to quick dismissal. A judge would discard the charges if prosecutors approached the bench with a demand to start the trial on the basis of unknown and thus undisclosed witnesses and documents because the current batch is a joke.
Chuck, you must be admitting that your charges are empty. Result: “Case dismissed!”
A proper legal response would be to take the embarrassing things back and continue your years-long inquisition to find something that will sell, anything. But from here on, though, a Congressional session (2 years) will be devoted to a little bit of legislation and a lot of impeachment.
Congressional public approval is in the toilet. After this becomes a permanent agenda item, Congress’s positives will make their way to the sewage treatment plant.
I know, I know, it’s Christmas eve but I couldn’t resist commenting on the latest impeachment fracas. Pelosi is holding impeachment hostage by refusing to deliver the articles of impeachment to the Senate. Like the sword of Damocles, now in the hands of Pelosi, Trump will face an assembly line of impeachment articles as she demands more witnesses and documents for further expeditions into all things Trump before she turns over the already-approved articles to the Senate. But she says that she is a good Catholic, hates no one, and prays for the target of her political jihad. Really, how good of a Catholic is she? Is this Christ-like behavior?
One has to wonder. Is it Christian to endlessly hound a citizen by placing them under the perpetual gaze of inquisitors? Is it Christian for one house of Congress to step outside its legal role of investigating possible wrongdoing and demand the other house, acting as jurors, step outside its role to do what the first house refused to do, such as produce the information that it chose not to provide as part of its duty? Trump is no angel, and neither are Pelosi, Schumer, and the Resistance.
Is it Christian for her to proudly announce her Christian bonafides as she soils the very doctrines of her faith? Under the euphemism “right to choose”, she crowed in 2018 that “I’m a rabid supporter of a woman’s right to choose …” Rabid indeed! Earlier this year, rather than condemn Ralph Northam’s (D, governor of Va.) support of a live-birth abortion bill in the Virginia legislature and his description of it, she dodged the question when asked. Not even the killing of a newborn can draw the ire of this allegedly “sincere” Catholic.
In addition, she has persistently opposed efforts to protect viable babies in the womb and those born alive in the course of an abortion. She is absolutely grotesque when it comes to the Christian responsibility to protect life.
Former Vice President Joe Biden was rejected for Holy Communion by a priest in South Carolina, Oct. 2019
It doesn’t stop there. In that space where some assertions of gay rights conflict with religious freedom strides the hubristic Nancy Pelosi. Religious freedom must give way, according to her holiness Pelosi. Her House-passed Equality Act would strip protections for denominations with Bible-based views on sexuality and family, particularly if their Christian calling carries them beyond the sanctuary into running orphanages, hospitals, counseling services, schools, and wherever human need lies. Pelosi wants to essentially rewrite millennia-old Christian doctrine to fit her social views. Where’s the Christianity in this?
Here Polish World War II war orphans are being cared for at a Catholic orphange after the War in 1946.
This season to honor the birth of Christ is saddled with the preachiness of a pagan-Christian. Yes, it’s an oxymoron and also a reality in today’s morally-confused Democratic Party. I find it hard to take seriously Pelosi’s attempt to wrap herself in the garb of the Church. Does the phrase “false prophet” remind you of anyone?
