Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

98 Views

The Iowa State Fair occurs in August, but we’ve entered a new fair season thanks to Leftists. Democrat candidates for President talk incessantly about fair wages. House Democrats are demanding the Senate hold a fair trial. And Leftists are demanding the rich pay their fair share.

All this fair talk and not a single corn dog to be found.

On the plus side, we can revisit a Leftist chestnut in the current context! Not as good as a corn dog, but hey.

fair

What the Left thinks it means – making things equal for the less fortunate, often involving taking from the plenty to give to the less fortunate

What it really means – an arbitrary word that can’t be achieved, even with an overbearing bureaucracy

We all want things to be fair because we’re not assholes for the most part. When something bad happens to us, we demand something happen to balance the scales (usually involving lawyers, some of which appear in TV commercials during “Maury”…not that I know about that, mind you). It’s even written in our founding documents in a fashion when referencing “all men are created equal.” America is a country where fairness is cherished and appreciated.

And that’s why the Left tries to inject it into every policy they advocate.

Take the “paying your fair share” concept. The Left continues to push the idea the rich aren’t carrying their share of the fiscal burden in America. And they’re right; they’re paying more than their fair share. When the top 10% of earners pays in the neighborhood of 90% of the tax burden, that’s not a fair system by any stretch of the imagination. But to the Left, it’s still fair because…the rich make more money, so they can afford to pay more!

In other words, the Left thinks a minority of the people paying the clear bulk of the tax burden isn’t fair, and the only way to make it fair is to have this minority pay more. Seems as legit as a Nigerian prince offering to share his fortune with you via email.

The same concept of fairness permeates the other Leftist ideas I mentioned. Essentially, the Left feels fairness only goes in the direction they want it to go, and it’s usually someone else who has to do the heavy lifting to make it happen. House Democrats put up laughable articles of impeachment, but it’s the Senate who has to call witnesses to ensure a “fair trial”. Workers aren’t getting paid enough, so companies have to bump up pay in order to have a “fair wage.” And anyone who disagrees with these just isn’t on board with fairness and that makes them meanie-heads!

Actually, it means we don’t share the same definition of fairness.

I’m going to rope in a bit of economic theory here, so if you’re not into that, skip ahead a couple of paragraphs. I promise it will be more entertaining than Al Gore giving play-by-play at a curling match.

Leftists believe in a “zero sum game.” If someone succeeds, it’s always at the cost of those less fortunate.  This, of course, is bunk. Wealth and poverty aren’t linked in that way. Bill Gates didn’t get ahead because he stole from Joe Sixpack. Instead, he got ahead by selling Joe Sixpack computers with buggy operating systems. You know, just like Grandpa did it!

The problem with a zero sum game mindset is it ignores the fact there is an infinite number of ways to make a buck, which means there is an infinite number of bucks to be made in our economy. As long as there is a need for a product or service, there will be a way for someone to make a profit. You could have a job that requires no discernable talent (like being a YouTube celebrity or a Congresscritter), but that doesn’t mean someone like me who is, thankfully, neither can’t make a buck or two in the same, similar, or different fields altogether. Our economic system is funny in that way. Just because someone gets ahead doesn’t mean we can’t get ahead, too.

There is another term to describe the Left’s concept of fairness, and that word is vengeance. The Left doesn’t want things to be fair because it cuts into their schtick, which is to convince people of how unfair everything is and then con them out of money to try to make things fair. And once they have your attention, it gets easier for them to manipulate you into agreeing with Leftist policies. They might even convince you that you’re a victim of unfair treatment and you need to make things right by sticking it to The Man.

See why I think vengeance is a better descriptor of what the Left means when they talk about fairness?

The part that escapes the Left more than their unintentionally ironic definition of fairness is it can never be totally achieved, even under the Leftist utopia being promised in all the brochures. That’s because we’re all different with different skills and abilities, educational backgrounds, socioeconomic circumstances, and so on. As much as I love to play basketball, I know I can’t turn it into a job with the NBA (not on a winning team, at least). Instead of trying to make the NBA put me on a team while talking about how unfair it is that I’m not already a starter, I’ve accepted my limitations, namely my entire basketball-related skill set. I don’t begrudge anyone using their talents to make money.

And that’s what the Left can’t do. Without a potential victim, the Left has no way to convince people how unfair things are in America. Maybe that’s because there are comparatively few actual victims of unfairness in America. We have a ways to go with the justice system and certainly with taxation, but by and large we are a fair country and always strive to do better. Some things can’t be fixed with more taxes on the wealthy, a $15 per hour minimum wage, or calling witnesses at a Senate impeachment trial, but a lot of things can be fixed by recognizing the Left only wants fairness for themselves, not for everyone. Even when they call for fairness, they feel they have to be on top.

And believe me, that would be the least fair result ever.

‘Twas the Week After Impeachmas

149 Views

‘Twas the week after Impeachmas and all through the House
The Dems were still cheering at impeaching Trump, that louse!
The Articles were hung near the Senate with care
In the hopes that Cocaine Mitch would run a trial that’s fair.

The Squad were nestled all snug in their beliefs
That impeaching Trump would soon bring them relief.
And Speaker Pelosi in her Prada, after finishing a night cap,
Had just settled in for a long wine-fueled nap.

When out near the Mall there arose such a clamor
But Pelosi didn’t stir because, well, she was hammered.
Rashida Tlaib took charge, running out like a heifer,
And started screaming, “Let’s impeach that MFer!”

The moon on the snow made the light seem to dance
And made poor little Adam take a Schiff in his pants.
When what to his big bugged out eyes did appear
But a big monster truck with Trump/Pence on its rear.

With an orange-hued driver, so lively and plump
They knew in a moment it was President Trump
More rapid than Creepy Joe Biden feels shame
He called to his minions and called them by name.

“On Nunes! On Limbaugh! On Pence and Rudy!
On Laura! On Pirro! On Rush and Hannity!
To heck with Impeachmas and what the Left wants
Let’s fill up their Twitter accounts with our taunts!”

As dry heaves wracked the Speaker before she blew chow
The Left cried, “We impeached him, but how?
How is he still more popular than we think?”
When Ms. Pelosi replied, “I’ll have another drink.”

And then in a twinkling (or was it a thunk),
AG Barr then appeared and said, “Listen, you punks.
Your articles were bogus, not a crime to be had,
And John Durham knows if you’ve been good or been bad.”

Trump dressed in a suit, dark blue, almost black
And his fingers flew quickly as he Tweeted another attack
“Impeachment is a hoax! Dems hunt for a witch!
And Schiff is a low down dumb son of a snitch!”

His eyes, how they sparkled, each time he hit Send
And then he would insult them again and again
He questioned Dems’ ethics and the extent of their crimes
He mocked Elizabeth Warren, for the sake of old times.

He blew up their Twitters, he lambasted the news
He made them even angrier by supporting the Jews
He mocked them as weak and without many brains
And said, “Take a look at those Stock Market gains!”

AOC was astounded! Adam Schiff was aghast!
(Speaker Pelosi, of course, was still drunk off her ass.)
Bernie Sanders was furious! Liz Warren’s face looked quite grim.
Tom Steyer kept trying to get people to pay attention to him.

Mayor Pete was in shock, for Trump’s tactics he did resent!
Tulsi Gabbard showed up just to vote “Present.”
The blood from all the Left’s faces did drain
When their rhetoric made Marianne Williamson sound sane.

Trump’s minions arrived on the White House West Lawn
And made note the Left’s hopes of removing Trump were gone.
The Left made the bed in which they would now lie
And all they could do was yell, curse, and cry.

There would be no removal, the impeachment was for naught
And soon the full fury of John Durham would be wrought
Their crimes would be exposed, their hopes would be dashed
(But not before their checks from George Soros could be cashed).

Impeachmas was pyrrhic in spite of their bliss
‘Cause they forgot “If you come for the king, you better not miss.”
Even Speaker Pelosi, still tipsy from the booze
Knew in the upcoming election, they’d be lucky to lose.

With one final Tweet, the President did turn
And let the Left’s hopes for 2020 smolder and burn
As the truck sped off like a giant metal manta
AOC looked puzzled and asked, “Was that Santa?”

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

145 Views

Welcome to the holiday season, where it seems like just about everyone is celebrating something. Christmas. Hanukkah. Boxing Day. Kwanzaa. International Day of the Sea Otter. (Okay, I made that one up, but I’m sure Hallmark and the US Postal Service are already working on cards to make that a thing.) And thanks to the Left, there’s a new one: Impeachmas.

Thanks to the House of Representatives impeaching President Donald Trump, Leftists went from the depth of despair to the heights of ecstasy in the span of a few days, mostly because Twitter Leftists don’t understand the impeachment process. No word yet on whether the aforementioned Hallmark and/or USPS are recognizing it as an official holiday yet, but it’s still early.

I know I’ve been harping on impeachment a lot lately, but with this new holiday, I want to show the appropriate amount of diversity and discuss it.

Mainly so I can mock it.

Impeachmas

What the Left thinks it means – a celebration of the rightful impeachment of Donald Trump

What it really means – a celebration of a foregone conclusion that will most likely accomplish nothing

As I’ve noted previously, the Left are primarily short-term thinkers, meaning they go more for instant gratification than long-term strategic victories. Remember when former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid enacted the “nuclear option” for President Barack Obama’s judicial appointments? Yeah, that worked out really well until Mitch McConnell used the same tactic to get President Trump’s judicial appointments pushed through like a Chipotle meal.

Impeachmas works on the same premise. It doesn’t matter what happens down the road; what matters is President Trump is impeached for whatever reason because it makes the Left feel good. And judging from the amount of whining, complaining, and emotional outbursts ranging from anger to frustration to depression that I’ve seen on social media, they needed this one to make them feel good for a little while. When you look at it from a slightly different perspective, President Trump’s impeachment was like a drug, which makes House Democrats the pushers.

As with other drugs, eventually the high will wear off. In this case, when the Senate gets the articles of impeachment and laughs them out of the Senate chamber (and justifiably so). Then what? And that’s the part the Left can’t answer because they’re too busy relishing their “accomplishment.” Of course, even Stevie Wonder channeling the Great Kreskin could have seen the result of the impeachment effort following the 2018 midterm elections, so it’s really not an accomplishment, per se. It’s like me throwing a party every Saturday and Sunday when I wake up and can stay in my jammies all day.

Yes, my Leftist friends, I am going to be a buzzkill, but since I’m not on your holiday card list, I don’t care.

Here’s the funny part. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and several other House Democrats talked at length about how somber and serious impeachment was. (It was so somber and serious, many House Democrats cheered when the articles of impeachment were approved.) Yet, outside the chamber, Leftists everywhere were celebrating, which undercuts what the Speaker was saying. I have to give credit where credit is due, though. Speaker Pelosi was correct. Impeachment is a serious matter and shouldn’t be taken lightly. To celebrate the outcome of a successful vote for impeachment makes the Left look really stupid. I mean, even more stupid than the articles of impeachment themselves, but I’ve already stepped off the soapbox on that subject.

Leftists will also get a bit of a tingle knowing the President was impeached, but before they go all Chris Matthews with Obama on us, let me interject another perspective. The first article of impeachment was for abuse of power, which isn’t actually against the law. By voting in favor of impeaching President Trump on that charge, the House has essentially created law without debate, without giving it to the Senate for consideration and debate, without the President signing or vetoing it, and without following normal legislative and/or legal protocol. To build upon a well-worn legal notion, they have not only proven you can indict a ham sandwich, but can charge and convict that ham sandwich of anything, legal or not, solely by the say-so of the House of Representatives.

And just like with Harry Reid nuking the nuclear option, this will come back to bite the Left in the ass like a school of piranha going after Rosie O’Donnell. The political pendulum will swing back someday, and what you set forth today may turn against you tomorrow. I wonder how many Leftists celebrating Impeachmas will be celebrating when the next Leftist/Democrat President gets impeached for not being a Republican by a Republican House. I’m guessing, oh, zero.

In the meantime, there is already a growing backlash against the House Democrats, not just in polling data, but in actual potential voters. I follow the #WalkAway movement on Facebook and have noticed a lot of former Democrats deciding to do just that because of the way House Democrats ran the impeachment circus. In some polls, impeachment is underwater in popularity, albeit within the margin of error. Even so, you cannot assume more people favor impeachment than oppose it. And with Leftists holding public Impeachmas parties and sharing photos on social media, you can bet those numbers will make Captain Nemo look landlocked.

We can have a discussion on whether President Donald Trump deserves to be impeached, but Impeachmas isn’t that discussion. It’s the epitome of being sore winners. And no matter how many times you try to impeach the President, it won’t undo the 2016 election. At best, you’ll get President Mike Pence and have to start the process all over again, this time with someone much harder to paint as crooked.

Good luck with that.

Do Not Stupid Here

153 Views

After watching the Left and the Right go on about President Donald Trump’s impeachment, I made a startling observation: impeachment is making everyone stupider. In my case, I feel myself getting stupider by watching people pontificate about impeachment while getting basic facts wrong, like what counts as impeachment.

Needless to say, I’ve been very depressed lately and wished the Sweet Meteor of Death had actually hit us in 2016.

A lot of this stupidity comes from a lack of even basic knowledge of civics and the Constitution. Turns out this kind of coursework isn’t even a requirement in many schools or it’s so slanted as to be utterly useless. We know more Kardashians than we do branches of government or Amendments in the Bill of Rights, but we have to be first with the hot takes so we appear to be informed. That’s why so many people on Twitter believed President Trump was impeached last week before the full House of Representatives cast a single vote in favor of the articles of impeachment. And I honestly believe a number of those same people think if Trump is impeached that Hillary Clinton becomes President. I even read a tweet from a Leftist saying President Trump is suspended from Presidential duties until the Senate trial is done.

Now, where did I put that booze?

The Right isn’t much better lately. The White House and many Trump-supporting pundits have advanced the notion the President isn’t really impeached because the House hasn’t officially presented the articles to the Senate. A novel idea, but with one major flaw: The House approved two articles of impeachment. You can look for any procedural loophole you want, but you can’t overlook the votes. Donald Trump is the third President in our history to be impeached. Period. End of discussion. Do not pass Go. Do not collect $200.

And where are our leaders in this mess? Well, they’re busy promoting the narratives their side wants to hear and believe, or they’re staying silent (I’m guessing to either stop themselves from looking foolish or to stop people from telling them off). Yet, if something erroneous comes out about them or affecting them directly, they will be the first ones breaking their silence and calling out the falsehoods because…reasons!

When you combine the lack of information, the absence of substantive pushback beyond “Nuh uh!”, and media and political inaction/fear, we have the perfect storm of stupid. And for people like me who know a thing or two about what’s going on, it’s tiring. So, I have a simple request.

Do Not Stupid Here.

I know it doesn’t make sense, but it’s an English translation of a sign in a foreign country that I’ve often wanted to adopt as a personal warning to others. And lately it’s become more of a necessity to let people know I’m not down for the clown show. If you want to discuss impeachment with me, all I ask is you come with an open mind and a logical, fact-based argument. And, no, “Orange Man Bad” or “Trump Good” doesn’t quality as an argument.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I have a video of a Yule Log burning that has my rapt attention.

Sit On It

156 Views

Nancy Pelosi can sit on the Articles of Impeachment all she wants. In fact she can sit on them until the 2020 election is over.

But of course by then President Trump will have won his landslide re-election. The Senate Republicans majority will be increased. And the Republicans will have retaken the House, and Nancy Pelosi will no longer be the Speaker.

The new Republican Speaker can continue with the program set by the Democratic Party and hold on to the Articles of Impeachment. This action will of course anger and cause the symptoms of Trump Derangement Syndrome to worsen in Leftist neverTrumpers everywhere.

Now in 2022, the Speaker of the House after the mid-term elections of that year can send the 3 year old Articles of Impeachment to the Senate, if the 2022 Speaker is a Democrat. If the Republicans still have the majority in 2022 then they can continue to hold on to it as the Democrats did in 2019.

But finally after the 2024 elections. The new Speaker of the House, no matter what party, can finally send the 2019 Articles of Impeachment to the Senate. Of course by this time the Senate will dismiss the charges since President Trump will have completed his 2nd term and will no longer be the active President. And a vote or trial wont matter.

Are they dogs or men?

139 Views

For decades our government has been held hostage by the whims of the Democratic Left. They cry “unfair” when they are not in the majority. And, I am sad to say, the Republicans have always turned tail or rolled over as cowardly dogs being kicked and have let the Leftist minority control everything.

Here and now the Leftist traitors are screaming that the Senate Impeachment Trial will be unfair to Democrats. It doesn’t matter to them that the House proceedings were biased and even unconstitutional towards the Republicans and the President. The Left cannot have what they do to others done to them. It has never been that way. No one has ever stood up against the bullies on the Left.

Speaker Pelosi has said that the (Leftist controlled) House will not release the Impeachment to the Senate until they get their way. This isn’t a bill that can be sat on Ma’am Speaker. The Constitution clearly puts this out of your control.

In the words of Caesar, the die has been cast. Now we will see if the cowardly dogs roll on their backs and get kicked again by the Left and kneel before their establishment deep state masters or if there is actually some men left in the Senate.

Do the Republicans really stand up for the Republic, the Rule of Law, and the US Constitution? Do we have any Statesmen left in the Senate? Or is it nothing but the Deep State where the letter after their name really has no meaning in the backroom deals. And the Republic is already dead as the Roman Republic was before it.

The Senate has the power to dismiss the charges against President Trump without a Trial. There is no solid evidence, it is only how the so-called witnesses felt or what they heard for someone else, which is hearsay and not admissible. You couldn’t be convicted of jaywalking with the same level of evidence that has been presented in the House. There is no case against the President. This impeachment is a waste of my money and the time of my representatives.

However, no matter the outcome in the Senate, the following will all be true. If the ruling in the Senate is favorable to the Left and President Trump is removed from Office then I have already stated what will happen. See the previous posts on this for details. It will also be the final nail in the coffin of the Republic. If the ruling in the Senate is not favorable to the Left. Then they will further waste time and money with more charges against the President and they may even take the matter of the Impeachment to the Supreme Court. It will be nothing but more insanity of Trump Derangement Syndrome.

And the votes are in

182 Views

The House has Impeached President Donald Trump. This was not unexpected at all given the impeachment process started 19 minutes after President Trump took office. The Leftist Democratic Party with their Trump Derangement Syndrome wanted to impeach this President at any cost. And now they have.

The results of the vote is also no surprise either. It was a very partisan issue. And the results speak for themselves on this as well. The final vote was 232 Yea and 196 Nay. 215 votes were needed for the measure to pass. And this could have been done without a single Republican even present.

231 Democrats voted for the Articles of Impeachment against President Trump. 194 Republicans and 2 Democrats voted against the Impeachment. I will tip my hat to Congressman Peterson of MN and Congressman Van Drew of NJ who were both able to see this farce for what it was. There were also 3 Republicans and 1 Democrat that did not vote. They should have and I think all 4 of them should be voted out of office.

Now President Trump has become the 3rd US President to be Impeached but unlike the previous impeachments. This one smacks of partisan manipulation in an attempt to remove a duly elected President because the opposition did not win in the 2106 election and they do not have the ability to win in 2020.

President Trump is no angel. But his administration has done great things for the United States and the world. We are far better off now then we were under the 2 previous administrations.

This Impeachment nonsense will now be forced on the Senate. There they will try the President. In order for the President to be found guilty and removed from office. The vote must be 67 or more finding the President guilty. I don’t see this happening. There wont be enough votes for it thankfully.

The Democratic Party will scream about how unfair the Senate proceedings are during this Trial. Ignoring the fact that their own proceedings in the House were unfair and even unlawful and Unconstitutional as well. But that is the par for the course with the Democratic Party. They can take those actions but the Republicans can never do the same. It has been this way for many decades.

I will say it a 3rd time. If President Trump is found Guilty in the Senate. The Leftist Democrats will NOT stop with the Impeachment of Trump. They will Impeach Pence before he can even take the oath of office as President with the hopes of also finding him Guilty in the Senate. Then Nancy Pelosi will be sworn in as President to finish the last few months of the presidential term. From that point the Leftist agenda will proceed full steam. With the further impeachments of all those appointed by President Trump, including Justice Kavenaugh. And the policies of the Trump Administration will be erased under Executive Order and the Republic will die. 

To what end?

167 Views

Yesterday the House announced that they had two Articles of Impeachment against President Trump.

In our Constitution the President can only be impeached for one of the following crimes:
Bribery, Treason, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

The first two crimes on the list are very specifically and legally defined. And hard solid evidence is required. Thus the Leftist Democratic controlled House couldn’t charge President Trump with Bribery or Treason. The Law would stand in their way.

Now the other high Crimes and Misdemeanors was wide open. These aren’t defined anywhere as to what constitutes them. So it is up to the House to determine what is a high Crime or Misdemeanor and impeachable.

And what does the House charge President Trump with after all this time. Abuse of Power and Obstruction of Congress.

President Trump hasn’t abused his power as President. He has faithfully exercised it, which many past Republican presidents have not done. And from a legal standpoint, abusing ones power isn’t illegal. Unethical, probably so, but not illegal.

Also the term of Abuse of Power is very nebulous and could apply to anything as well. Even something harmless and mundane like getting tickets to a ball game.

The second charge of Obstruction of Congress. That one sounds bad since it sounds like another known crime. But this one too isn’t actually a crime either.

President Trump did exercise his power as the chief executive and forbade certain members of the Administration from testifying before the various House committees investigating the alleged impeachment proceedings. But this is within the rights of a President to protect his Administration.

The House could have acted on the refusal but they did not. If they really wanted the testimony of these witnesses they could have issued a subpoena. Demanding that they come before the House committee and testify. But this was not done. If it had been done and the subpoena was refused. Then Congress could have gone through the Courts and issued a court order for their appearance. But this also was not done. If it had been done and still refused. Then and only then would President Trump and the witnesses themselves be guilty of Contempt of Congress. And that could be an impeachable offense.

But all the House did was ask for the witnesses to testify. They refused. And that was the end of it. Request denied. Thus the charge of Obstruction of Congress is meaningless.

And now here we are nearly four years since this all started when prominent Democrats began calling for the impeachment of then President-Elect Donald Trump in 2016. They have finally the Articles drafted in the House. The House has enough of a Democratic majority to pass the Articles even if some Democrats vote against it. Thus forcing a Trial in the Senate.

But to what end does this serve? The House would be better served if they had passed a censure against the President, even on the same charges. It would have passed. It would have been a victory. Now the Impeachment will be handed over to the Senate where the President could likely be acquitted just as President Clinton was at his impeachment Trial. And the 2020 elections are coming fast with disastrous results for the Leftist Democrats if this fails in the Senate.

That’s It?

161 Views

Today, House Democrats announced they would introduce two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump. After weeks of testimony, months of investigation, and years of blathering about both on the news, they finally decided on…abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

The audible thud you heard was the Left’s expectations crashing like the Hindenburg, but with a lot less fire.

Maybe it’s me, but these articles of impeachment seem to be missing something, like…say…actual illegal activity. After all, the standard for impeachment is “high crimes and misdemeanors,” which heavily suggests there has to be some illegal activity for impeachment to be warranted. And, yes, I know impeachment is a political process and not a legal one, but you would need to either be inept or a spin doctor extraordinaire to arrive at abuse of power and obstruction of Congress as crimes.

Then again, these are House Democrats we’re dealing with here, so it’s possible both are in play.

With the last impeachment on record, that of Bill “Commander in Briefs” Clinton, House Republicans put forth a total of four counts of impeachment, all them tied to actual law. The two the House decided upon were perjury and obstruction of justice. Compare that to the two counts House Democrats cobbled together. The only one that comes close to legal precedent is obstruction of Congress, which is only close because it’s one word off from the actual crime.

With that, let’s take a closer look at the two counts of impeachment against President Trump.

First, there’s abuse of power. That is such a nebulous charge it could apply to anyone and anything. If the President got a meter maid to let him or her stay in a parking spot 5 minutes after the meter ran out? ABUSE OF POWER! The President borrowed a book from the library and hasn’t returned it in 2 years? ABUSE OF POWER!

Now, here’s the tricky part: abuse of power may not be a crime nor a misdemeanor. To my knowledge (which I admit may not be as thorough as some of the legal scholars out there), abuse of power isn’t against the law. It’s certainly not ethical, but it may not be criminal. And there is a vast difference between legal and ethical, one that House Democrats don’t appear to see in front of them. If this one doesn’t get laughed out of the House in a bipartisan effort, I’ll be disappointed, but not surprised for a reason I’ll get into later.

The second charge of obstruction of Congress has a bit more precedent behind it. Contempt of Congress has both criminal and civil punishments to it, which would fall under the actual high crimes and misdemeanors section of the Constitution. Where it falls apart is with what has happened so far with the Impeach-A-Palooza campaign. President Trump barred some members of his office from testifying, but Trump himself hasn’t been called to testify before Congress. He’s been invited, although perhaps more tongue-in-cheek than serious, but he hasn’t been called by any of the House Democrats running the multitude of committees involved in the process. Another technicality, I know, but one that changes the dynamic of the charge itself. If one is not called to testify before Congress and isn’t called to produce documents, one cannot be charged with contempt of Congress under the letter of the law.

And the self-professed “defenders of the Constitution” have failed to see the simple logical trap they fell into.

Reaction to the two impeachment articles ranged from “why aren’t there more” on the Left to “you got nothing” on the Right. For the purposes of this impeachment fiasco, I’m siding with the Right. Although both sides of this situation can rightly be accused of having partisan blinders on, the fact remains none of this would have happened if House Democrats hadn’t decided to go all in on impeaching President Trump for reasons that can best be described as petty. If you doubt me, look at Leftist Twitter right now. They are inventing high crimes and misdemeanors to justify their belief President Trump should be impeached, and few of them have any actual legal foundation. To put it mildly, they are losing their hivemind over this. The Left is out for blood and they will stop at nothing, including inventing new laws out of Orange Man Bad, to sate their bloodlust.

Having said that, I think the obstruction of Congress charge has enough legs to get through the House, and the Senate will not punish President Trump on it, mainly on party lines. What impact will that have on the President? None. He’s pretty much written off the impeachment as so much of a joke Amy Schumer is going to steal it for her next comedy special, “Who Are You and Why Should We Care?” The people who support him will continue to do so, those who don’t will continue to berate him, and people trying to play both sides of the fence will continue to pretend to be Nadia Comaneci while holding in their opinions so they can appear above it all.

What the Left isn’t taking into consideration is the fact impeachment isn’t a winning issue to a lot of people, including Democrats. Based on early speculation on how the votes are going to go, there are a handful of Democrats willing to break ranks with the party leadership and vote against impeachment. Given the fact impeachment is polling worse than toejam right now, this isn’t a dumb move on their part. So far, there’s only one former Republican, Justin Amash, willing to vote for impeachment. Now, I’m no math whiz, but if even 2 Democrats vote against impeachment, that’s already a net loss for the Left.

In the grand scheme of things, though, it may not matter. All it takes for a majority in the House is 218 votes, and Democrats have 233 votes currently. If things go by a party line or mostly party line vote, the House will be able to impeach President Trump. Yet, of the two articles so far, only one has any kind of legal foundation. This is enough under the Constitution, but it may not be enough for the voting public. In today’s political climate, even the perfectly justifiable will fall to the whims of the people.

House Democrats have taken a risk with Impeach-A-Palooza, and outside of their allies in the media and their sycophantic ideological bubble-mates, few people have come around to their way of thinking. And with there being less than a year before the 2020 elections, they don’t have the time to spare splitting their time among impeachment, going on cable news shows and talking about impeachment, trying to get something done legislatively that doesn’t suck like a Hoover at the center of a black hole, energizing the base to keep voting and donating, trying to help candidates, watching their pennies as donations to the DNC get drier than a sand martini in Vegas, deciding which member of the Democrat Clown Car to support so they might get a spot in his or her Cabinet should the President be defeated, and pretending they don’t care what the President tweets while acting like Pavlov’s dogs in a room full of alarm clocks all set to go off at the same time.

Whew! I haven’t seen anyone juggle that many balls since the last gay orgy I attended, but that’s another story for another time. In the meantime, I’ll be over here watching Nancy Pelosi play the fiddle while Congress burns.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

146 Views

As another week of the Left’s Impeach-A-Palooza goes on, the House Judiciary Committee asked for input from four scholars about whether President Donald Trump committed impeachable offenses. Of the four, three were clearly on the pro-impeach side (as evidenced by some of their social media posts before the House Judiciary Committee hearing was a thing), and one was on the anti-impeach side.

Guess who got the bulk of the attention.

As many colleges and universities across the country are letting out for winter break, I think it’s time we take a closer look at what a scholar is and see if the title fits the people granted it.

scholar

What the Left thinks it means – a learned expert on a field of study whose work cannot be questioned

What it really means – a Leftist with a title and tenure

The Left loves to use scholars to justify their ideas. Manmade Climate Change? Here’s a list of scholars who believe in it (some of whom actually have a background in climate science!). Need someone to whitewash abortion? Here’s a list of scholars who think abortion is no big deal! Want to show how the patriarchy is alive and well at women’s colleges? Here’s a list of scholars who can prove it! If you have a pet cause, the Left has a scholar ready and willing to parrot whatever line you want him or her to say.

This, of course, is a logical fallacy called Appeal to Authority. Basically, it’s when someone tries to turn back any argument critical of his or her argument by saying, “But I have [insert name or profession of someone allegedly smarter than us] to back me up, so you’re wrong.” The key to this type of argumentation is to make it seem like one side has the intellectual high ground based solely on who agrees with you and without that pesky little thing the kids today like to call facts.

Let’s take the Left’s new favorite climate poster child, Greta Thunberg. On the basis of one impassioned (and, quite frankly, so hammy it goes against both the Hebrew and Muslim faiths) speech, Ms. Thunberg was elevated to untouchable status, even to the point she is considered to be a leader in the climate change movement. In other words, the Left has made her into a saint…I mean scholar on climate change. Yet, she doesn’t have the intellectual pedigree to back up that elevation. She’s gotten famous all because she said, “How dare you?” at the United Nations while her ideas are unfounded in anything resembling science.

Hmmm…wasn’t there a former Vice President who experienced the same elevation on climate change without a scintilla of scientific evidence, someone who continues to warn us about rising sea levels as he buys up more beachfront property? I swear there was, but I’ll be damned if I can remember his name. Oh well. Guess we’ll never know. I won’t Al Bore you with further speculation…

The funny thing about the Left’s use of scholarship is it only goes one way. When they use it to support their ideas, you can’t argue against it because you’re “anti-science.” When it gets used against them, the scholar isn’t credible due to a supposed lack of peer reviewed work. As someone familiar with the quality of peer review, or lack thereof, getting a peer reviewed paper if you’re a Leftist is easier than getting a lap dance from Stormy Daniels right now. But if you express anything to the right of Leo Trotsky, no peer will touch it, except to dismiss it as drivel (even if they don’t read it). Just ask John Lott Jr. about his papers on gun ownership reducing crime.

Without going too much further down this rabbit hole, keep in mind these same scholars are teaching college students and filling their heads full of Leftist dogma, thus creating a wonderful world of self-justifying ideas once these students get out into the real world and start voting or taking up causes. Just remember scholars can be absolutely wrong or waaaaaaay off in left field with their ideas. Your Women’s Studies professor may be a nice person, but that doesn’t make his or her ideas sacrosanct. The point of education is not to regurgitate what the instructor tells you, especially with Common Core math because that stuff is nuts. Education comes when you challenge your own ideas and the ideas of others in the intellectual squared circle. The minute an instructor/scholar tells you it’s his/her way or the highway is the minute you learn you have nothing else to learn from them.

As impressive as it might be to have legal scholars testifying about high crimes and misdemeanors in front of the House Judiciary Committee, the question remains the same: do they add value to the arguments being made? Based on what I’ve read so far of their testimony, only the anti-impeachment scholar did. The others were repeating tired talking points, which is exactly what the House Democrats wanted to divert attention away from the fact their first attempt yielded testimony from people who have no proof of what the President is alleged to have done that warranted impeachment in the first place. Bringing in scholars may add context, but it doesn’t add content. Unless they have relevant information to the alleged crimes and not just their opinions on such, it’s more hot air and more of our money being spent on a quest even Don Quixote would pass at.

Oh, I remember that former Vice President now! It was Spiro Agnew!