Escape global warming! Buy one of these frozen farms

RayStevens - The Global Warming Song

Ray Stevens

Trump Accuses Pelosi Of Quid Pro Quo, Suggests Impeaching Her

Daily Wire via Weasel Zippers  "President Donald Trump ripped Democrat House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Friday for withholding the articles of impeachment from the Senate, stating that was engaged in a “quid pro quo” and suggesting that she should be impeached.
"Trump’s tweet comes as Pelosi continues to hold the partisan articles of impeachment against Trump from going to the Senate because she is worried that the political trial would be biased in favor of the president.
“ 'Nancy Pelosi is looking for a Quid Pro Quo with the Senate,” Trump tweeted. “Why aren’t we Impeaching her?”

Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump

Nancy Pelosi is looking for a Quid Pro Quo with the Senate. Why aren’t we Impeaching her?

"Following the Democrats’ vote on impeachment, Pelosi told reporters in reference to sending the articles of impeachment to the Senate, “So far we haven’t seen anything that looks fair to us. That would’ve been our intention, but we’ll see what happens over there.” . . .

Analysis: With Glaring Missteps, Pelosi Exposes Her Supposedly Urgent and 'Prayerful' Impeachment as a Partisan Sham

They now claim that the trial won't be "fair" because some of the jurors aren't impartial, citing comments from McConnell and Graham. Wait until they hear some of the things Chuck Schumer said in the late 1990s about the Clinton impeachment trial

Guy Benson  "When this idea first started percolating on Twitter among the Very Online Left, I dismissed it as silliness.  Nancy Pelosi wants impeachment over and done with, and she's made a grand show of carrying this 'duty' out with supposed 'prayerful solemnity.'  It seemed obvious that she would instantly dismiss any harebrained scheme that would needlessly and pointlessly drag out the process, accomplish nothing, and fuel the Trump narrative that the whole enterprise is a petty partisan sham.  And yet...

Manu Raju  ‏erified account Follow @mkrajuMoreIn a remarkable press conference, Pelosi refused to say repeatedly if the House would send over the articles to the Senate. She would not guarantee sending over the articles to the Senate until they are assured a fair trial. She wouldn’t describe what a fair trial was

"I fail to see the "pressure" or "leverage" this plan allegedly places on Senate Republicans. Mitch McConnell will happily ignore the House's dumb games, keep confirming judges day after day, and hammer House Democrats for their unseriousness -- which would likely further erode support for impeachment. Remember, Democrats argued that they had to rush through the process at warp speed because time was of the essence and our very "democracy was at stake," or whatever. But now they're going to sit on the articles of impeachment they've passed, for an indefinite period of time, until...Senate Republicans adopt minority-demanded rules that are less favorable to President Trump than the 1999 trial rules were for President Clinton? C'mon. This is especially rich, given Team Pelosi's dominance of the process in the lower chamber, eschewing the bipartisan template set out during the previous two modern impeachments.

"Democrats say the evidence they've collected is open-and-shut. Clear as day. Indisputable. They should be eager to allow the 'jury' to weigh it and render a verdict. They now claim that the trial won't be "fair" because some of the jurors aren't impartial, citing comments from McConnell and Graham. Wait until they hear some of the things Chuck Schumer said in the late 1990s about the Clinton impeachment trial. Or what Democratic jurors are saying this very week. Recuse: . . ."       Illustration by Stilton's Place

Democrat’s Impeachment Lawyer Says Trump Is Not Impeached If Pelosi Sits On Articles Of Impeachment

Daily Caller

[Feldman] notes that just because the media reported Trump was impeached, doesn’t mean he really was. “As for the headlines we saw after the House vote saying, ‘TRUMP IMPEACHED.’ those are a media shorthand, not a technically correct legal statement.”

"The Harvard law professor who appeared as a Democratic witness before the judiciary committee impeachment hearing says impeachment hasn’t been concluded until the House delivers the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate.

"Noah Feldman indicated in an op-ed published by Bloomberg that the Articles of Impeachment, approved in a House vote Wednesday night, need to be delivered to the Senate in order to actually impeach President Donald Trump.

“ 'The House must actually send the articles and send managers to the Senate to prosecute the impeachment. And the Senate must actually hold a trial,” Feldman wrote. (RELATED: Democrats Stack Judiciary Impeachment Hearing With Anti-Trump Lawyers)

"That poses something of a problem for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi  who is being coy about when, if, or how she plans to move impeachment forward. The Democratic California congresswoman says she might sit on the articles until she is assured of a “fair” trial in the Senate. House Majority Whip James Clyburn has even suggested the Democrats might never advance the impeachment process.

"That’s a position that Republican South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, called “incredibly dangerous” and “uncharted waters — constitutionally,” on Thursday.

"Feldman, no ally of Republicans or the president, would agree." . . .

More on why we must not let Democrats rule over us

'Let's do this!': Tlaib posts gleeful video before impeachment vote

"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi instructed her caucus to come to the impeachment vote Wednesday with a somber bearing, insisting that there be no cheering for the occasion of referring charges against the president of the United States to the Senate.
"But the congresswoman known for declaring only hours after being sworn into office her intent to "impeach the motherf----" couldn't help herself.
"She posted an Instagram video of her grinning with delight as she walked toward the House floor to cast her vote." . . .
So solemn. So somber. So gleeful

"President Trump posted Tlaib's video." 
'This is what the Dems are dealing with. Does anyone think this is good for the USA!" he said.
"Tlaib also posted a photograph of herself and Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif. – known for her regular calls over the past three years to "impeach 45" –smiling with the caption: "MOOD."
"The hashtag "impeached" was prominently stamped on the photo."

Republicans, let's find a synonym for "deplorable" that we can use

Democrats will rue the day they forced this impeachment through the House
"Note the disconnect between Democrat triumphalism in D.C., and a packed 10,000-seat arena in a key battleground state."

Is this man just the tip of the iceberg?

Dems Learning the Hard Way Why Impeachments Are So Rare

The current "animosity" of congressional Democrats can no better be personified than in Rashida Tlaib, just hours after being sworn into the House of Representatives, telling the nation that she had told her child, "We're gonna impeach the m-----------." 

 " The Democrats will learn the full impact of our disgust on election night 2020. Predictably, they'll be quick to blame the Russians or Ukrainians for yet another of their failures."

Steven Ziegler at Mark Levin's Fan Club of Intelligent, Thinking Women (and Men)

The insanity continues. Adam Schiff went public with claims he’s investigating Vice President Mike Pence.Adam Schiff Is Now Targeting Vice President Pence For Impeachment;

DCWhispers

"The insanity continues. This week, Congressman Adam Schiff went public with claims he’s investigating Vice President Mike Pence."

"Via Gateway Pundit: Adam Schiff went on with Rachel Maddow last night to push their Trump-Ukraine conspiracy — something that was completely debunked everywhere after three weeks of testimony except on CNN, MSNBC and the fake news media.

"During their conversation Schiff announced he was going after Vice President Mike Pence next and may have “acquired evidence” that the Vice President is hiding information in the House Ukrainian investigation.

"Jennifer Williams testified before Congress in November and offered nothing. She worked for Vice President Mike Pence. So now Schiff has Democrats thinking Williams holds the key to Pence’s impeachment."

Adam Schiff Sets Eyes on Pence – Tells MSNBC He’s “Acquired Evidence” from Vice President’s Office on Ukrainian Investigation

"Adam Schiff went on with Rachel Maddow last night to push their Trump-Ukraine conspiracy — something that was completely debunked everywhere after three weeks of testimony except on CNN, MSNBC and the fake news media."
. . . 
"Jennifer Williams testified before Congress in November and offered nothing. She worked for Vice President Mike Pence. So now Schiff has Democrats thinking Williams holds the key to Pence’s impeachment."
He may replace Obama as the favorite guest of TV talk shows.

Democrats are joyful over this?

The impeachment and crossing over  . . . "Though I’ve been leaning and often voting Republican in recent years, it was the Democratic Convention from July 25-28, 2016, and the radical left agenda introduced there, that was for me the defining moment when I knew I was no longer a Democrat." .  . .

. . . "The guilty conscience, the uncertainty, the shame, were all dispelled in a single gavel strike.  Not only was I right to switch parties, I am proud to have done so; to become Republican. And proud to have voted for Donald Trump.  Now, for me there is no looking back; only looking forward.
"I clicked off the TV, went to bed, and slept like a baby. And awoke with a feeling of optimism, and a renewed invigoration heading into 2020.  I can’t help wondering how many Democrats can say the same." . . .

Trump Lawyers Ask If Pelosi Delay Means He Isn’t Impeached Yet

The case is a rhetorical one following Wednesday night’s vote to impeach the president on two articles. The U.S. Constitution grants the House of Representatives full authority over impeachment. But the argument is part of an effort by the White House and Senate Republicans to maximize their leverage as lawmakers debate when and how to conduct a trial on charges that the president abused his power to solicit an investigation into political rival Joe Biden, and obstructed the congressional investigation into the matter.

How would Democrats rule over us?

As when Obama was president, every day I wondered what they would do to us next.
People in California must go to bed with the same anxiety.TD

Joe Biden is coming for your job  . . . "He said as much at last night's Democratic debate.

"Debate moderator Tim Alberta of Politico asked the Democratic frontrunner this:

“Three consecutive American presidents have enjoyed stints of economic growth, due to a boom in oil and natural gas production, as President would you be willing to sacrifice some of that growth, even knowing potentially that it could displace thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of blue collar workers, in the interest of transitioning into that greener economy?” 

"Biden's reply? (Emphasis mine)

"The answer’s yes. The answer's yes (hands up), because the opportunity for those workers to transition to high-paying jobs, Tom [Steyer] said, is real. We're the only country in the world that’s taken great, great crises and turned them into enormous opportunities.

 This Time It Is Personal — for Us  "Those pathological haters and congenital liars impeached not only President Trump on Wednesday night. They impeached us. This time it is personal. That is my  vote they are trying to take away. As an Orthodox Jew, I know plenty about governments taking away my vote. Rome did it to me in Talmudic times. Western Europe did it to me in the Medieval ages. The Ottoman Sultan did it to me. Sheiks did it to me. The Tsar did it to me. Hitler did it to me. Stalin did it to me. Damned if I am going to let a mob of socialist and lying Democrats do it to me. The muck stops here."

The Exact Opposite of Truth

The American Spectator
                Democrats and their media henchmen are lying about everything.
"One of the basic methods of propaganda is reversal — make an accusation against your enemies that is so blatantly false as to be the exact opposite of truth. This technique has become known as “the Big Lie” because of a passage in Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf: “In the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses … more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.”

"Hitler claimed that “the Big Lie” was a trick of the Jews, who had used it to falsely blame the German high command for defeat in World War I; Hitler, by contrast, blamed the Jews “and their fighting comrades, the Marxists” for Germany’s defeat. Of course, Hitler’s so-called “stab-in-the-back” myth of why Germany lost in 1918 was false; the German army was simply incapable of winning once the United States entered the war on the side of the Allies, and it was the German high command’s authorization of unlimited submarine warfare that had brought America into the war. Thus even in his now widely cited description of “the Big Lie,” Hitler was engaged in the propaganda technique that he pretended to deplore — reversal, or what is known in psychology as projection.

"Americans so far have been fortunately protected by our Constitution from outright totalitarianism, but this protection does not make us safe from propaganda." . . . 

The List Of CNN’s Bungled Reporting Is A Sight To Behold

. . . "The following list details 20 additional stories that CNN has bungled following the rise of Trump." . . .

It's starting to look like the House vote to impeach President Trump was the impeachment that wasn't.

Ian Macfarlane

"It's starting to look like the House vote to impeach President Trump was the impeachment that wasn't.

"That's the word from a lot of legal scholars, including Noah Feldman, who was one of the three leftist professors who spoke before the House Judiciary committee, arguing for impeaching Trump. shortly before the Democrats' deed was done.

"In a Bloomberg column, Feldman wrote:

 Impeachment as contemplated by the Constitution does not consist merely of the vote by the House, but of the process of sending the articles to the Senate for trial. Both parts are necessary to make an impeachment under the Constitution: The House must actually send the articles and send managers to the Senate to prosecute the impeachment. And the Senate must actually hold a trial.

...and...

But if the House never sends the articles, then Trump could say with strong justification that he was never actually impeached. And that’s probably not the message Congressional Democrats are hoping to send.

"Feldman's a bigwig in his own Harvard Law circles and Democrats certainly take his word for it on the importance of impeaching Trump. But he's far from the only one reading the law to say that as it's being excuted now, with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi declaring she might not send the articles of impeachment for the Senate to vote on until she can dictate terms, she's invalidating her own impeachment.

"Former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy, a conservative, pretty much says the same thing. In a National Review column, he wrote:" . . .

If Impeachment Articles Are Not Delivered, Did Impeachment Happen?
"It’s hard to believe the Speaker’s latest stunt will go on for very long.
. . . "For these last weeks, the Democrat-dominated chamber has been in a mad rush to impeach the president. Democrats even tacked on article two — “obstruction of Congress” — because, they told us, time could not be wasted engaging in the usual negotiation and litigation over legislative demands for executive branch information. Trump is a clear and present threat to “continue” undermining our elections, we were admonished. That’s why he needs to be impeached right now. That’s why the political class cannot responsibly leave his fate up to the sovereign, the People, who will vote in November.

"But now that the deed is done, it’s . . . hey, not so fast." . . .

For The LGBT Mob, Lesbian Ads On The Hallmark Channel Are Just The Beginning

The Federalist

But, culturally speaking, Hallmark Christmas movies are noticeably Christian. The characters don’t take off their clothes, murder anyone, or use profanity. The hero loves children and defends the poor. The heroine who begins the story loving her self-involved life in the city chooses family and a life of self-sacrifice in her hometown by the end of the tale.

"On the latest episode of “Everybody on the Internet is Angry,” the Hallmark Channel found itself caught between a Christian rock and an LGBT hard place. After the network ran a commercial from online wedding firm Zola featuring a lesbian wedding, One Million Moms, a division of the American Family Association, “voiced its concern and gave Hallmark the opportunity to do the right thing.”

"Hallmark quickly dropped the ad from its schedule, but after complaints from “prominent LGBT celebrities and advocacy groups” and the rise of #BoycottHallmarkChannel on Twitter, the network reversed its decision, with Hallmark CEO Mike Perry apologizing for the hurt the company had caused and stating, “Hallmark will be working with GLAAD to better represent the LGBT community across our portfolio of brands.” 

"To some, it may seem this fiasco could have been avoided if certain Christian Hallmark channel viewers weren’t such sensitive babies. “Is the image of two women getting married so troubling,” some might think, “that you can no longer stand to see if Candace Cameron Bure falls in love with the handsome banker who was sent to town to foreclose on her parents’ cinnamon farm?”

"But easy as it is to cry “baby” and “bigot” at those who don’t want gay weddings lauded during commercial breaks, the truth is, like most bursts of the culture wars, this specific battle wasn’t really about the outward issue. The problem for many Christians is not so much the ad itself but what the ad represents.

In a theological sense, the Hallmark Channel is not a Christian broadcasting network. More to the point, the 6,000 original “Christmas” movies the network airs every December are not genuinely Christian films in content.

"The characters rarely, if ever, pray or worship. The plots never revolve around the heroine saving a church or reading Luke’s nativity account to the flannel-clad, hunky widower’s precocious daughter. The stories never end with the couple kneeling in a sanctuary on Christmas Eve, proclaiming the wonders of the God who took on human flesh to save them from their sins." . . .