Jeff Van Drew’s Reasoning For Switching Parties

Van Drew also says that he was troubled by the leftward lunge of the Democrats: “I’m a proud capitalist”

LEGAL INSURRECTION has some Tweets about the issue:

“The party is moving further and further to the left, where there is discussion of it being a socialist party. And I am a proud capitalist. I believe in hard work. I believe that we can give people opportunity, but that they also, when they get that opportunity, have to work hard to achieve success. You can’t give them success.”

He then says that the final straw for him was being told to vote for impeachment . . . or else.

“But the final sign for me was oddly enough actually in my home county when one of the county chairmen came to me and said, ‘I have to speak with you.’ I said, ‘Sure.’ He said, ‘I just want to let you know that you have to vote for impeachment … If you don’t, you’re not going to be able to run in my county.’”

This didn’t sit well with Van Drew who feels the impeachment articles are “thin” and “weak.”

“This impeachment is a weak, thin impeachment that just doesn’t really mean anything much to most of the American people. It has been a long, dark, shadow on our country.” –@CongressmanJVD pic.twitter.com/cH0EN20D3A

— GOP (@GOP) December 22, 2019

James Baker Lied Then With What We Now Know

LIBERTARIAN HUB notes this recent rumination from Baker and then the FLASHBACK video:

In an interview on CNN, Baker went further in his critique of the bureau than did FBI Director James Comey, who said Sunday that he believed the FBI was “sloppy” in its efforts to obtain Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants against Page.

“Sloppiness is completely unacceptable. That is not the way you operate in front of a federal court. I don’t know what word you want to use, it’s terrible, it’s unacceptable, it shouldn’t happen. That is not the way we should be filing matters in front of a federal court,” Baker told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer.

“I was distressed about it. I was completely distressed about it,” Baker said of his response to the inspector general’s (IG) findings.

Baker has testified that he personally reviewed the FISA applications against Page, given their political sensitivity….

It’s a Process — Impeachment (Alan Dershowitz)

THE BLAZE catalogs the debate between Dershowitz and Laurence Tribe via NEWSMAX. The best book written on the subject is the one pictured here… it delves into the debates over this PROCESS well.

I here reproduce the arguments I think the Founders clearly noted in their deliberations about the impeachment clause:

“It is difficult to imagine anything more unconstitutional, more violative of the intention of the Framers, more of a denial of basic due process and civil liberties, more unfair to the president and more likely to increase the current divisiveness among the American people. Put bluntly, it is hard to imagine a worse idea put forward by good people,” he added.

[….]

“President Trump would stand accused of two articles of impeachment without having an opportunity to be acquitted by the institution selected by the Framers to try all cases of impeachment,” Dershowitz said. “It would be as if a prosecutor deliberately decided to indict a criminal defendant but not to put him on trial.”

[….]

Dershowitz concluded that to deny Trump the “fundamental right” of a speedy trial “might serve the temporary interests of the Democratic Party, and academics who support it, but would do violence to the rule of constitutional law that is supposed to serve all Americans, regardless of party or ideology.”

This echoes leftist Harvard Law Professor Noah Feldman, who testified on behalf of Democrats in front of the House Judiciary Committee earlier this month, essentially saying President Trump isn’t actually impeached until the Pelosi sends the articles to the other side of Capitol Hill. Feldman argues this point in a new piece for Bloomberg titled, “Trump Isn’t Impeached Until the House Tells the Senate.”

  • According to the Constitution, impeachment is a process, not a vote. If the House does not communicate its impeachment to the Senate, it hasn’t actually impeached the president. If the articles are not transmitted, Trump could legitimately say that he wasn’t truly impeached at all.”(TOWNHALL)

Polls Show An Increase In Black Support For Trump

INSIDE SOURCES has a great article regarding the possible bounce in the black community towards their home team, the GOP:

The new Emerson poll puts Trump at 35 percent with black voters and 38 percent with Hispanics. “If you add in Asian voters at 28 percent approval,” notes Emerson’s director of polling Spencer Kimball, “our number is very close to the new Marist poll,” which finds Trump’s approval at 33 percent among non-white voters.  A recent RasmussenReports poll has Trump support among black voters at 34 percent, and even the new CNN poll has Trump’s approval among non-white voters at 26 percent.

[….]

  • New Emerson poll: 35% (Black) Hispanic (38%) Asian (28%)
  • Marist poll: 33% (non-white voters)
  • Rasmussen Reports: 34% (Black)
  • CNN poll: 26% (non-white voters)

…There was a considerable buzz when the Rasmussen poll showed 34 percent support for President Trump amid black ‘likely voters’…. but the political media dismissed it.  Then came a more recent Emerson University poll showing 34.5% support from black voters.  With two polls showing a very similar result it was less likely to be an outlier…. But again, the political media dismissed them both.

However, a third poll, this time from NPR/PBS and Marist, confirms the prior two almost identically.  The latest Marist Poll shows 33% non-white support for President Trump…

(INSIDE SOURCES and CONSERVATIVE TREE HOUSE)

[….]

“Trump clearly thinks he should be improving on the 8 percent vote among blacks he received three years ago,” writes Gallup’s senior scientist Frank Newport. “Based on what we see so far in terms of black ratings of the job Trump is doing as president, currently at 10 percent, I don’t see a high probability of that happening.”

And it may not.  But the non-traditional nature of the Trump presidency combined with his overt efforts to engage black voters means Democrats may have to change their math.  From Kanye West’s Oval Office photo op to the campaign’s Black Voices for Trump” coalition to a focus on historically black colleges and universities, Donald Trump is reaching out to African-American voters more aggressively than any Republican president in recent years.

Meanwhile, some black activists are stepping up, too. African-American conservatives Autry Pruitt and James Golden — better known as Rush Limbaugh’s senior producer ‘Bo Snerdly’ — just launched a new website, MAGA.BLACKwith the self-declared mission to “Make Black Americans Republican Again.”

Golden, aka ‘Snerdley,’ told InsideSources that Democrats aren’t having a conversation that’s connecting with black voters. “My mother is a die-hard Democrat, and even she is sick of the Democrats’ impeachment efforts. She’s not paying any attention to it. She recently told me her party should stop picking on Trump and let the man do his job.”

Democrats may be right about talk of 30 percent of black voters backing Trump being unrealistic. But if Trump gets half that support, his re-election would be all but assured. According to research reported by the Washington Post, Trump’s 2016 win was aided in part by a national drop in black turnout of just 4.7 points from 2012. In the swing states, black turnout fell a modest 5.3 percent.

Are black voters who stayed home rather than back Hillary Clinton really going to turn out for a Pete Buttigieg or Liz Warren?  If low unemployment and investment in education convince just 5 percent of black voters to cast their first GOP ballot, or (more likely) stay home, how do Democrats make up for those lost votes in Detroit, Philadelphia, Charlotte and Jacksonville?

Critics at CNN can mock Trump’s high-profile black supporters like Kanye, but Golden believes that’s a mistake. “Kanye isn’t alone. There are more African Americans speaking out now than at any other time I remember.”

Maybe just enough to re-elect Donald Trump….

DIAMOND and SILK do discuss the ZOGBY “cold water” on the above when they quote the following:

In all cases, while black support for Trump dropped when an alternative was offered, it was higher than the 8% he received in 2016 and maybe enough to push him across the finish line first in 2020.

Against Joe Biden, Trump receives 12% of the black vote. Against Sen. Bernie Sanders, it was 14%. And against Sen. Elizabeth Warren, it was 17%.

Those levels are the best for a GOP president or presidential candidate since 1968.

While he had a 5% margin of error, Zogby said the trend is clear. “If Trump is able to up his numbers over 10% or near 15%, and with a lower turnout among African Americans because they are not excited by the field of candidates or turned off by D.C., Trump could really benefit from this scenario in the 2020 general election,” he told us.

What this brings to mind however, if the total lack of business sense the Democrats exhibit. To wit, “The Sage” is still on the money!

  • I add video to what Larry can only sample audio of (obviously because of the medium). I also add a long interview at the end with BET Founder Bob Johnson, who praised President Trump at a White House for his 401(k) Auto Portability Program. Also added is video of Democrat Bill Lockyer scolding fellow Democrats about their JUNK SPENDING. Great “Sage” commentary. ENJOY!

Here is some more COMMON SENSE news regarding the black community and their bottom line:

According to the website Black Enterprise which has a readership of African-American business people and entrepreneurs:

The Black Voices for Trump coalition launch is kicking off Nov. 8 with a 3 p.m. rally at the Georgia World Congress Center. During the rally, Trump is expected to address the black unemployment rate and highlight a program in the Republicans’ 2017 tax-cut legislation that encourages investors to put money into underserved communities.

“Black Americans have never had a better champion than President Trump,” Katrina Pierson, senior advisor at Donald J. Trump for President Inc., wrote in a statement emailed to Newsweek. “The Black Voices for Trump coalition will be a national effort to mobilize and empower Black Americans who support President Trump to help get the message of ‘Promises Made, Promises Kept’ into communities across America.”

She added, “Under President Trump, unemployment for African Americans has reached historic lows and nearly 1.4 million new jobs have been added for African Americans. Black Americans’ strong support for President Trump will ensure a second term for the President.”

Back-n-Forth from My Facebook Regarding Impeachment

Some conversation arose from the following post on my Facebook — which is a short excerpt and then link to this article:

If you’re like me and getting into conversations with people about the Trump impeachment, then you need a short, simple summary of the facts.

Quote:

Essentially the Democrats are accusing Trump of shaking down Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky by withholding aid and demanding announcement of investigations, including one involving Joe Biden’s son, Hunter.

To this, the central charge in the articles of impeachment, Rep. Jim Jordan and others presented four specific facts. First, both Trump and Zelensky say there was no pressure applied. Second, the transcript does not indicate Trump making any demands or setting any conditions. Third, Ukraine was not aware that the aid was delayed. And fourth, aid flowed without any announcement of investigations. Taken together, these four defenses have more than enough weight to crush the Democrats’ case, but lets look at them one by one.

Here are some conversations via the above with JIM G. First up, the proclivity of people to offer psychoanalyses about other peoples position based on the interpreter’s (JIM G.) dislike of a person:

JIM G.

Of course Zelensky says their was no pressure. He knows Trump will make him pay dearly if he says anything else. Ukraine desperately needs our support and Trump has already revealed his willingness to withhold that support.

SEAN G.

Trump didn’t reveal anything of the sort. Zelenski got javelins before and after the phone call. I guess the real question is is why did Democrats not help the Ukraine?

JIM G.

first of all, it’s “Ukraine,” not “the Ukraine” just like it is “Canada,” not “the Canada.”

As for why Democrats did not help, I don’t know. But that does not excuse Trump’s attempted shakedown.

[….]

Jordan’s analysis of the so called “transcript” is absurd. It’s like he holds up a black piece of paper and says, “Look, it’s white!”

SEAN G.

if the paper being held up is “black” as you say. Why didn’t the Democrats include an impeachment article saying it was black?

Let me explain this a bit. I have already shared this with JIM, but I want to remind my audience as well with an excerpt from a previous convo also on Facebook:

  • So two articles of impeachment have been put forward. Bribery was what CNN says was the Crux of the case a few weeks ago. However, remember all the terms changed over time: quid pro quo, to extortion, to bribery, to obstruction of justice. None of these are part of the impeachment articles. One impeachment article is “obstruction of Congress” (read here Democrats). What a joke! I think a bulk of the American voters see through this sham/witch Hunt.

This is what I am referring to.

JIM G.

Yes, Ukraine was aware that the aid was delayed.

Aid only flowed after Trump knew he was caught.

SEAN G.

[quote]

One of the few facts in all of this where there is some debate is when exactly Ukraine became aware that the military aid had been delayed. But all versions place it very late in the timeline of events, certainly long after the July 25 phone call with Zelensky. That’s like trying to blackmail someone with scandalous photos of them without letting them know you have any scandalous photos of them. It’s impossible.

The delay of the aid was part of a wider set of concerns regarding how much Ukraine could be trusted with the money. Throughout the late summer and fall, through a set of meetings and phone calls with American officials Zelensky proved to Trump that he could be trusted. That is what Trump wanted to know and why he released the aid without any announcement of investigations.

And that final fact, that the aid was released without the announcements Democrats claim were the condition to release them, really puts the period on the sentence. Democrats claim the aid was only released on September 11 because the White House became aware of the whistleblower report. But this ignores the fact the aid had to release by September 30, and doing so is a two-week process.

So essentially, aid was released on or about the deadline set to release it. That is a much more plausible explanation for the timing than some whistleblower report spooking Trump. Is it possible Trump was angry at yet again being undermined by people in the federal government for exercising his legitimate powers? Sure. But there is no evidence to suggest that Trump was ever planning to ultimately kill the aid.

(again, THE FEDERALIST)

[un-quote]

The aid was set to be released at a certain time, and it wasNot because “Trump thought he was caught.” Dumb.

I then posted this as a reminder that there is no quid-pro-quo in the call. No bribery, or anything like it:

Hugh Hewitt and Generalissimo Duane read the phone call Trump had with the Ukrainian President. One debunked position people attribute to the call was that President Trump used military aid as a barganing chip to get what he wanted from Ukraine. However, the far Left magazine, THE NATION, notes this about the issue:

  • Democratic leaders and media pundits are convinced that Trump extorted Ukraine by delaying military aid to compel an investigation into Biden. Their theory may prove correct, but the available evidence does not, as of now, make for a strong case. Trump had held up military aid to Ukraine by the time of his call with Zelensky, but if the public transcript is accurate, it did not come up during their conversation. According to The New York Times, Zelensky’s government did not learn that the military aid was frozen until more than one month later. Democratic Senator Chris Murphy, who met with Zelensky in early September, said that the Ukrainian president “did not make any connection between the aid that had been cut off and the requests that he was getting from [Trump attorney Rudy] Giuliani.” It will be difficult to prove extortion if Trump’s purported target was unaware.

Here is where I have had a response in my quiver for two-months that in the following convo I FINALLY got to use (and yes, like a true nerd I was excited when I saw JIM’S response):

... C (a)

JIM G.

It’s a summary edited by the White House. It’s not a transcript.

I will add to the conversation below so the reader here has a fuller picture of the issue to help them respond to family/friends/co-workers/etc:

SEAN G.

It is [a transcript]. In fact, TIN BOY Vindman said a single word was missing [from the transcript that he tried to have reinserted], and it didn’t change the meaning of the transcript.

Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman testified in Tuesday’s impeachment hearing that the omission of the word “Burisma” — the Ukrainian natural gas firm that hired Hunter Biden to serve in a lucrative role on the board — in the transcript of President Trump’s July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was not “significant,” despite some prior controversy over the missing references.
(video linked in original conversation directly below)

It is worse than that though. GATEWAY PUNDIT notes the total lack of conspiracy theories proffered by the Left and #NeverTrumpers.

Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, a National Security Council aide, was one of three people on the infamous July 25 phone call between President Trump and Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky. Democrats allege that Trump demanded Zelensky investigate the business dealings of Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, with Ukrainian power company Burisma, then omitted the word from a transcript of the call, which they say White House then hid in a secure server.

Not so, Vindman said.

Vindman testified under oath in Tuesday’s impeachment hearing before the House Intelligence Committee that the omission of the word “Burisma” was not “significant.”

He attributed the omission “to the fact that this transcript being produced may have not caught the word Burisma.”

“It was in the transcript that was released as ‘the company,’ which is accurate,” Vindman testified. “It’s not a significant omission,” he said, later adding: “I didn’t see that as nefarious.” Vindman added that it was “informed speculation that the folks that produce these transcripts do the best they can, and they just didn’t catch the word.”

He also shot down conspiracy theories that the White House moved the call transcript to a secure server to keep it from Democrats.

Again, not so, Vindman said.

Vindman testified Tuesday that storing the transcript in a secure server was not unusual.

“Why would it be put on a separate secure system?” Vindman was asked.

“This is definitely not unprecedented,” he said. “At times, if you want to limit access to a smaller group of folks you put it on the secure system to insure that a smaller group of people with access to the secure system have it.”

BaBoom! Every key witness shot down major MSM and Democrat conspiracy stories.

…CONTINUING WITH OUR EXCHANGE…

... C (b)

JIM G.

the call was approximately 30 minutes. The “transcript” covers roughly 10 minutes.

Here it is… the Pièce De Résistance

SEAN G.

almost 15-minutes. The translators had to translate [which] essentially doubles the time

Those were the best parts from that convo.

Christianity Today Hates Religious Freedom (Hugh Hewitt)

Hugh Hewitt quickly deals with the Christianity Today article seeking Trump’s removal from office.

First, there was no quid-pro-quo in the call… here is the entire transcript read out loud:

Also, there was nothing in the articles of impeachment anywhere near a “high-crime-and-misdemeanor”

So two articles of impeachment have been put forward. Bribery was what CNN says was the Crux of the case a few weeks ago. However, remember all the terms changed over time: quid pro quo, to extortion, to bribery, to obstruction of justice. None of these are part of the impeachment articles. One impeachment article is “obstruction of Congress” (read here Democrats). What a joke! I think a bulk of the American voters see through this sham/witch Hunt.

(RPT: IG Report Slams FBI and Others)

More regarding Christianity Today via LIFE NEWS:

Franklin Graham called out the magazine on social media saying, in part: “Yes, @BillyGraham founded Christianity Today; but no, he would not agree w/ their piece. He’d be disappointed.” He later tweeted this revealing fact about his father: “I hadn’t shared who my father @BillyGraham voted for in 2016, but because of @CTMagazine’s article, I felt it necessary to share now. My father knew @realDonaldTrump, believed in him & voted for him. He believed Donald J. Trump was the man for this hour in history for our nation.”

Uhhh, mic drop.

Christianity Today didn’t call for the removal of a Presidential Predator—Bill Clinton. In their 1998 article entitled “The Prodigal Who Didn’t Come Home”, they lamented his inadequate “apology.” According to CT, Clinton merely “missed a truly historic moment” with what could’ve been a “straightforward admission.” But the conclusion of the article really showed the “progressive” magazine’s hopes for the impeached President: “At this writing, we expect Clinton to hang tough, to remain the comeback kid he is known to be.”

That was gracious.

Then there was the 1974 CT editorial that asked the question “Should Nixon Resign?” In it, there is never a call for removal. “The transcripts show him to be a person who has failed gravely to live up to the moral demands of our Judeo-Christian heritage. We do not expect perfection, but we rightly expect our leaders, and especially our President, to practice a higher level of morality than the tapes reveal,” writes CT. I agree with those sentiments exactly. We should expect so much more from our elected leaders. It is tragic how Christians, too often, repeatedly justify political corruption over personal character all in the name of Party allegiance. The following two sentences show CT’s blatant contradiction, though: “Yet the Constitution does not provide for the removal of a President because of moral flaws. To resign would be to leave the presidency for other than a constitutional offense.”

Christianity Today, and many other liberal evangelical outlets, rightfully point out the moral failings in (select) elected leaders. Yet they often fail to apply the same standards to those on the Left, especially when those politicians are advocating issues that CT champions. But where was the call for removal of President Barack Obama? For the first time in history, an American President keynoted a fundraising gala for the leading killer of those made in God’s image—Planned Parenthood. Though Obama campaigned on “middle ground” rhetoric regarding abortion, he never sought it as President. In fact, he was the most radically pro-abortion President in history. Eerily echoing Democrat Governor George Wallace’s famous segregation declaration, Obama proclaimed at the gala: “Planned Parenthood is not going anywhere. It’s not going anywhere today. It’s not going anywhere tomorrow.” The response from the crowd was thunderous applause. He ended the speech to the organization that kills over 330,000 of the most marginalized and most victimized in our society: “God Bless Planned Parenthood!”

But enabling and supporting the shedding of innocent blood apparently isn’t enough for Christianity Today to have called for the ousting of President Barack Obama. That behavior wasn’t immoral enough for his removal.

[….]

I find the Left’s obsession with demonizing and distorting his every action and word equally as immoral. Slander is a sin, too, people. I’ll never be invited, like many of my colleagues, to the Trump White House. I’ve never been a Trump apologist, but I will defend the rule of law. I know the alternative to a Trump presidency would’ve been a Hillary Clinton presidency. I didn’t choose the lesser of two evils. I chose to vote my conscience with a Party platform that aligns with my faith and common sense….

Pelosi Admits They’ve Been Trying to Impeach Trump For 2 1/2 Years

Nancy Pelosi claimed that

  • “’No member, regardless of party or politics, comes to Congress to impeach a president,’ Mrs. Pelosi, California Democrat, said during the floor debate on two articles of impeachment against Mr. Trump.” (WASHINGTON TIMES)

Maxine Waters and Rashida Tlaib literally came to Congress wanting that. Also, Nancy admitted it is what she wanted, via THE FEDERALIST PAPERS

But five days before that speech she gave another where she let the American citizens see behind the curtain.

“You’ve been hesitant for weeks to make the move and cautious to make this move to impeach. Was there an ‘aha’ moment for your personally, a piece of evidence or testimony that swayed you now to take this step?” a reporter asked.

“Well, I’m glad you asked that question, because all I hear from the press is that I move so swiftly that it’s like a blur going by.

“This has been a couple of years – two and a half – since the initial investigation of the U.S. – of the Russian involvement in America’s election, which started much of this and led to other things,” she said.

Was it a mistake? It could be that she did not mean to say that. But wait, there was another reporter, another question and another answer.

“So, all along I said for two years, this is an impeachment, it is not a pleasant experience, it can be divisive. We don’t take any glee in this at all. It is heartbreaking,” she said.

Two mistakes? That is possible. Everyone makes mistakes. Let’s see her answer to a third question.

“We feel comfortable with all of the time that has gone into this, two and a half years since the appointment of Mueller and all that that has, that has transpired since then.

“I’m not, I have confidence, humility, again a heart full of love for America,” she said.

I do not know, I’m not an expert, but when someone tells me that they have been working on something for two and a half years, and they say it three times, I take them at their word….

The media as well:

  • There was this racy headline, from Vanity Fair on Nov. 14, 2016: “Will Trump Be Impeached?”
  • Then this, yet another Vanity Fair piece, on Dec. 15, 2016: “Democrats Are Paving the Way to Impeach Donald Trump.”
  • There was this, from The New York Times, in an opinion headline from Nov. 3, 2016: “Donald Trump’s Impeachment Threat.”
  • Remember: Trump wasn’t inaugurated until Jan. 20, 2017. He wasn’t even elected president until Nov. 8, 2016.

Joe Biden’s NPR Lies About Trump

Larry Elder opens up a segment in his third hour yesterday with trouncing Joe Biden’s vacuous claims regarding Trump. I reordered (edited) the events from this segment to make more sense, but after it a caller asks a simple but poignant question, to which Larry Elder responds. LArry had a short segment here, so he wasn’t able (like in the past) to respond to the “BIG THREE” lies about Trump Biden goes through… but I deal with them here: “SOME TRUMP SIZED MANTRAS

Greta Thunberg… Just Another Marxist

“Fossil fuels are literally choking the life from us, that action must be powerful and wide-ranging. After all, the climate crisis is not just about the environment. It is a crisis of human rights, of justice, and of political will. Colonial, racist, and patriarchal systems of oppression have created and fueled it. We need to dismantle them all. Our political leaders can no longer shirk their responsibilities.” — Greta Thunberg

(Remember, these people are allotted a roll in life to lecture us) A good read is this article about Greta:

Greta is eleven years old and has gone two months without eating. Her heart rate and blood pressure show clear signs of starvation. She has stopped speaking to anyone but her parents and younger sister, Beata.

After years of depression, eating disorders, and anxiety attacks, she finally receives a medical diagnosis: Asperger’s syndrome, high-functioning autism, and OCD. She also suffers from selective mutism—which explains why she sometimes can’t speak to anyone outside her closest family. When she wants to tell a climate researcher that she plans a school strike on behalf of the environment, she speaks through her father.

The book Scenes from the Heart (“Scener från Hjärtat,” 2018) recounts these medical difficulties and the events that led to Greta Thunberg’s now-famous “school strike for climate,” in which hundreds of thousands of children have refused to attend school to protest about government inaction over climate change. Greta herself strikes every Friday and spent three weeks sitting outside the Swedish Parliament at the beginning of the school year. Written by her family—mother, father, Beata and Greta—the story is told in the voice of Greta’s mother, the opera soprano Malena Ernman, who was a celebrity in Europe long before her daughter’s fame. Although the book is only available in Swedish for the time being, it is already being translated into numerous languages—a development that reflects the global fascination with Thunberg’s campaign.

We are offered a story of “a family in crisis and a planet in crisis”—two phenomena that are presented as inextricably linked. The book posits that oppression of women, minorities, and people with disabilities stem from the same overarching root problem as climate change: an unsustainable way of life. The family’s private crisis and the global climate crisis, the authors argue, are simply symptoms of the same systemic disorder.

Greta is not alone in her mental suffering, according to the book. Her sister Beata, who was 12 when the book was written, lives with ADHD, Asperger’s syndrome, and OCD. She is prone to sudden outbursts of anger, during which she screams obscenities at her mother. What would normally be a 10-minute walk to dance class takes almost an hour because Beata insists on walking with her left foot in front, refuses to step on certain parts of the sidewalk, and demands that her mother walk the same way. She also insists that her mother wait outside during class—she isn’t allowed to move, even to go to the bathroom. The child still ends up weeping in her mother’s arms.

[….]

I do not wish to suggest that Greta is too young to understand the consequences of her actions, nor that the challenges she faces make her unsuitable to take a stand on political issues, or even to lead a global movement. No one who has heard her address world leaders in impeccable English can doubt that she is very intelligent. Ernman also stresses that her daughter has never felt better than during her campaign for the climate. Greta herself has said that realizing that she could do something about climate change has helped her recover.

I am also not questioning Greta’s role as a public speaker, nor the power of hundreds of thousands of protesting school children, nor that climate change is an existential threat to humankind.

But adults have a moral obligation to remain adults in relation to children and not be carried away by emotions, icons, selfies, images of mass protests, or messianic or revolutionary dreams.

Greta was recently named ”Woman of the Year” by a Swedish newspaper. But she is not a woman, she is a child. It is time we stopped to ask if we are using her, failing her, and even sacrificing her, for what we perceive to be a greater good.

GOP Rep. Clay Higgins (R-LA) Is Legend!

He should have ended with something like: “I surrender my time, but not my will.”

Full Transcript:

  • I have descended into the belly of the beast. I have witnessed the terror within and I rise committed to oppose the insidious forces which threaten our Republic. America is being severely injured by this betrayal, by this unjust and weaponized impeachment brought upon us by the same socialists who threaten unborn life in the womb, who threaten First Amendment rights of conservatives, who threaten Second Amendment protections of every American patriot, and who long ago determined that they would organize and conspire to overthrow President Trump. We don’t face this horror because the Democrats have all of the sudden become constitutionalists! We’re not being devoured from within because of some surreal assertion of the Socialists’ newfound love for the very flag they tread upon! We face this horror because of THIS MAP! This is what the Democrats fear. They fear the true will of ‘We the People.’ They are deep establishment D.C. They fear, they call this Republican map ‘flyover country.’ They call us deplorables. They fear our faith. They fear our strength. They fear our unity. They fear our vote and the fear our president. We will NEVER surrender our nation to career establishment DC politicians and bureaucrats. Our Republic shall survive this threat from within. American patriots shall prevail. Mr. Speaker, I yield.

FLASHBACK:

President Trump’s Letter To Speaker Pelosi (Read by Hugh Hewitt)

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)

Letter From President Trump… by charliespiering on Scribd

Schiff Caught Lying… AGAIN! (UPDATED!)

The below is hilarious — why!? — because Schiff called Nunes’ work lies since he put the memo out detailing the abuses of the FBI to the FISA Court. The IG Report said almost the same thing as Nunes has been saying this WHOLE TIME! In fact, on MSNBC we can see (July of 2018) Schiff knowingly lying!


UPDATES
HATRED OF NUNES


ACE OF SPADES is the author of compiling the below… read it all:

“Do you think he’ll get called on the carpet by anybody who has been following this story for two years?” Bream asked.

“Well, one of the wonders, to me, of modern media is the failure of my colleagues in this business to see through this guy Schiff,” Hume said. “He has been dishonest repeatedly. He made extravagant claims about the amount of evidence he had of Russia collusion, evidence that it turned out that not even the Mueller team with all of its investigative powers did not discover and that he, Schiff, never specified. Of course the report came out and basically blew up this whole Russia collusion theory.

“Now comes this whole question of FISA abuse and he’s still telling whoppers about that. It’s amazing that he isn’t called out. And then of course he gets tapped by Nancy Pelosi to lead the impeachment inquiry. Wow!”

Schiff isn’t the only person who owes apologies to Devin Nunes and anyone who believed his lies — many NeverTrumpers also swore up and down that Devin Nunes was a liar (and that Adam Schiff was truthful), but refuse to acknowledge this, retract prior claims, and explain what partisan fury caused them to get so many things so wrong for so long.

Below, some flashbacks of the media denouncing Devin Nunes, first in reaction to his press conference announcing FISA abuse, then in reaction to his memo documenting this abuse.

Which the NeverTrumpers all denied, along with their ally Adam Schiff.