(More at NOQ REPORT)
As an UPDATE… she was planning this all along… it wasn’t like “my emotions got the best of me.” No, she premeditated the act.:
Video confirms Nancy Pelosi ripping up the #SOTU speech was PREMEDITATED:
9:49 PM: Pelosi makes small tears to the paper after POTUS mentions “new cures for childhood cancer” and eradicating AIDS.
10:24 PM: Pelosi holds up the already torn paper and finishes ripping it in half. pic.twitter.com/IR2y9CeYVo
— Trump War Room – Text WOKE to 88022 (@TrumpWarRoom) February 5, 2020
(More at the NEW YORK POST)
JONATHAN TURLEY writes on his website about the tradition Nancy trampled on:
And from THE HILL, Turley notes,
(FOX NEWS) “Mitch McConnell shouldn’t be subjecting himself to the extortion of Nancy Pelosi,” Jarrett said to guest host Tammy Bruce. “He can, beginning in January, simply alter the rule or eliminate it entirely and set a date for an impeachment trial.”
“Simply change the rule, hold a trial, do it. Do it on your own terms,” Jarrett advised McConnell.
Hugh Hewitt took the time to read the entire letter from President Trump to Speaker Nancy Pelosi. (If you wish, the entire letter is below for your reading pleasure)
Rush made some excellent analysis of the Democrats today… but I needed to make this consumable (short). So here are two separate points joined together to show this will not end when he wins in 2020 — and that this has been in the works (impeachment) since 2016.
In the fight between left vs right, Democrats vs Republicans, progressives vs conservatives, the sides are clear. The motives are clear. One side will say what they believe helps them the most and hurts their opponents at the same time. It may be ugly, but it’s honest (at least in their intentions if not in substance).
On Tuesday, Representative Devin Nunes (R-CA) laid out the Republican case against impeachment in his opening statement as the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee. In his statement, he did as most expected and attacked the Democrats’ case, but the real meat and potatoes from his statement came in the form of attacks against mainstream media. (NOQ REPORT)
Rep. John Ratcliffe, notes that Democrats have called Trump’s conduct “bribery” and then pulls out a mountain of papers of deposition transcripts. He says at no point have witnesses described his conduct as “bribery” in the last six weeks. He says the word appears only once — and that’s in relation to former Vice President Joe Biden’s alleged conduct.
LEGAL INSURRECTION — Rep Elise Stefanik!
Here’s a few notable clips from this evening’s hearing, the first of which is both Tim Morrison and Kurt Volker agreeing that Zelensky had no idea that the Ukraine ad was being held up at the time of the July 25th phone call…
Volker also testified that there was no quid pro quo or ‘bribery’, as they are now calling it:
And finally, Morrison, who was listening in on the July 25th phone call between Trump and Zelensky says nothing concerned him about the call:
Yet again, Chairman Adam Schiff blocks questions from Republicans, refusing to allow @Jim_Jordan to inquire about one of the two individuals Vindman read out about the July 25 call.
If Schiff doesn’t know who the “whistleblower” is, why is he objecting to this question? pic.twitter.com/J7E6wBRI8l
— Rep Andy Biggs (@RepAndyBiggsAZ) November 19, 2019
The issue mentioned below about calling witnesses (supoena power by Republicans) is not granted under Pelosi’s resolution. So NOT like the majority offered rights to the minority during Nixon and during Clinton. Here is another example of Schiff’s almost Soviet style circus show. Rep. Jim Jordan is now telling us that Adam Schiff is blocking the witness from answering specific questions from Republicans (RIGHT SCOOP):
NEW: Rep. Jim Jordan says Adam Schiff has blocked Republican questions that could lead to the unmasking of the whistleblower. pic.twitter.com/QBk3xxXNKi
— Zach Purser Brown (@zachjourno) October 29, 2019
(Some more disparities are pointed out in a PREVIOUS POST)
PJ-MEDIA opines rightly:
- If this is truly an open and fair process, both sides should be able to ask questions of the witnesses, and Adam Schiff should not be preventing witnesses from answering questions or stopping Republicans from asking questions. This is clearly not a fair process. “This has been a tainted process from the start,” Scalise said. “What happened today confirms even worse just how poorly Adam Schiff is handling this process, denying the ability for Republicans to even ask basic questions that are critical to the heart of whether or not a President of the United States is impeached.”
After showing some TWEETS by Sean Davis and Byron York, RED STATE sums up the resolution by Nancy Pelosi well:
Democrats should be watching the polling of Independents.
And this is the million-dollar question, answered by Rep. Chaffetz… House Speaker Pelosi does not want to give subpoena power to House Republicans, says Fox News contributor Jason Chaffetz, former chairman of the House Oversight and Reform Committee.
HUGH HEWITT reads Kimberly Strassel’s column, earlier today:
A little POWRLINE intro please: The Democrats’ hysteria over Attorney General William Barr is directly proportional to their fear of the damage they fear he might do, Kim Strassel explains in her Wall Street Journal Potomac Watch column HERE:
Nancy Pelosi is a goof. This is what she said:
No, no he or she cannot do that Mrs. Pelosi.
There is both a positive and negative aspect to this part of the Constitution. In other words, a President cannot declare an emergency that violates the 2nd Amendment. (I can’t believe a high school drop out 3-time felon has to point that out to the Speaker of the House.)