17 thoughts on “News/Politics 1-25-20

  1. Meanwhile they let Biden tell them how to report on him.


    This is why we call you hacks and clowns, because you play along.


  2. Another clown gets hoisted by his own petard.

    “Chris Cuomo Snaps That Greta Thunberg Off-Limits Because She’s A Teen. Social Media Reminds Him Of A Certain Kentucky Teenager.”


    “After Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin offered some free advice to teenage environmentalist Greta Thunberg, advising her to study economics in college so she understands more completely the catastrophic economic effect her chosen policies would engender, CNN anchor Christopher Cuomo, displaying not the slightest ounce of self-reflection, went on the attack, tweeting, “Why do these trumpers think it is ok to go at a kid?”

    Cuomo’s network is the same network that bitterly attacked 16-year old Nicholas Sandmann after the March for Life in 2019; so bitterly, in fact, that the network had to reach a settlement after Sandmann sued them.

    As The Washington Post reported, the exchange with Mnuchin that prompted Cuomo’s comments went like this:

    Reporter: “Greta Thunberg has called for public and private sector divestment from fossil fuel companies. Does that pose a threat to this U.S. economic growth that you guys are talking about?”

    Mnuchin: “Is she the chief economist or who is she? I’m confused.”

    Reporter: “Greta Thunberg.”

    Mnuchin: “It’s a joke! After she goes and studies economics in college she can go back and explain that to us.””



  3. But by all means Dems and media, continue what you’re doing. It’s working….

    For Trump. 🙂


    “ABC/WaPo: Trump Climbs To Highest Job Approval Rating Of His Presidency Amid Impeachment Trial”

    “It’s not impeachment, or rather a backlash to impeachment, that’s causing this. But I think it’s safe to say that impeachment isn’t slowing him down either.

    Impeachment is just … there. Not really good for him, not really bad. It’s just sort of what’s on TV this week.

    The baseline number here is underwhelming. However…

    President Trump’s approval rating has climbed to match the highest of his presidency, boosted by majority approval of his economic stewardship even as Americans remain deeply divided on whether the Senate should remove him from office, according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll.

    The Post-ABC poll finds 44 percent of Americans approve of Trump’s overall job performance and 51 percent disapprove. While views of Trump remain negative, Trump’s approval rating is significantly improved from his 38 percent mark in late October.

    A 44/51 split as the *high-water mark* of one’s presidency is dismal but that’s the number among all American adults. When you look instead at registered voters, the sort of people who are more likely to actually turn out in an election, it creeps up to 47/50. Among independent adults he’s at 47/48, up nine points since October and right on the cusp of net positive territory. That’s a pretty respectable base of support in a hyperpartisan age from which to launch a reelection campaign.”


    And we all know how notoriously inaccurate the polls have been, so add 5-10% to what they say it is, and you’ll be about right. 🙂


  4. If your single issue is preserving life, I have no issue with it. What single issue could be more important?


    “March for Life 2020: I’m a single-issue, pro-life voter. What’s wrong with that?

    At the ballot box, voters aren’t choosing a pope or pastor, but a politician who can impact public policy. It makes sense to vote on the issues.”

    “Single-issue voters — depending on the issue — often face condescending commentary about their limited world view.

    That’s not as true for those who say climate change or immigration animates their politics. But for people who consider themselves pro-life, it’s common to hear the complaint that embracing the call to defend both mothers and pre-born children is an inadequate, shortsighted choice. I frequently hear that when speaking on college campuses across the country, and usually it’s paired with the slur that if pro-life Americans really cared about children, we would do more for the living — though not those living in the womb.

    An exchange I had with a student from Miami University of Oxford last May is case in point. The student argued that pro-lifers were actually going to cause suffering because if a baby was permitted to live, things might go wrong and the child could end up in foster care. The student’s conclusion was that we both need to end life in the womb and quit focusing on abortion until, apparently, all other problems in the world are solved.

    My question to her was one I’ve asked many people: Is it upsetting that the American Diabetes Association doesn’t fight cancer, or that the American Cancer Association is not trying to cure every life-ending disease?

    The answer to that question from her and others is always no. People understand that specializing in a subject, working to become more excellent and effective in addressing a problem, is one of the pursuits of adult life. At some point, passions become professions so that change can occur. And it’s the same for people who are engaged in the human rights issue of our day, abortion.

    A dedicated voting bloc
    With concern for the pain and problems abortion can cause, some voters crystallize abortion as the defining criteria for our vote. A recent poll of more than 40,000 Americans shows that pro-life voters are significantly more likely than those who support legal abortion to say they will only vote for a candidate who agrees with them on that issue (27% to just 18%).

    Just this week, a Marist Poll sponsored by the Knights of Columbus found “by a margin of 10 percentage points (45% to 35%), those who identify as pro-life are more likely to say abortion is a ‘major factor’ in their vote for president than those who identify as pro-choice.””


  5. I t amazes me that they let that fraud Schiff lie on the Senate floor with impunity, as he also did in the House.

    He’s been wrong, or lying on about every detail.(still waiting on the Russian collusion evidence you keep insisting you have yet no one has ever seen Schifty)

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Put them under oath and expose this for the coup it’s always been.

    “If Eric Ciaramella is the ‘Whistleblower’, Then He, IG Michael Atkinson and Adam Schiff Must Be Questioned Under Oath Right Away”


    “The name of the man many believe to be the “whistleblower,” Eric Ciaramella (EC), whose complaint triggered the circus we’ve been forced to endure, continues to pop up in the most unexpected of places. As these incidents multiply, it’s becoming clearer by the day that EC, the Intelligence Community Inspector General, Michael Atkinson, who received his “urgent” complaint, bloviator Adam Schiff and Sean Misko, EC’s former colleague at the National Security Council with whom he has a “bro-like” relationship, must all be questioned under oath immediately. If EC is the individual who filed the complaint, then this is the greatest “hit and run” in American political history.

    In the last week alone, we learned from Fox News’ Laura Ingraham that EC was one of the principals in a January 2016 meeting between a group of Ukrainian government and embassy officials and their U.S. counterparts at the White House. Contrary to Democratic talking points, the meeting was set up because Obama Administration officials were quite concerned about Hunter Biden’s lucrative position with Burisma Holdings, a company which was under investigation at the time by the Ukrainian government. In addition to his key role in the meeting, EC’s name shows up on the White House visitor log as the person who checked the Ukrainians into the building. (I posted on this story here.)

    We also learned from Real Clear Investigations’ Paul Sperry that two weeks after President Trump’s inauguration, EC and his colleague/friend, Sean Misko, were allegedly overheard by two former National Security Council officials discussing ways to remove him from office. These two individuals spoke to Sperry on the condition of anonymity. (I posted on this story here.) They also told him that, as we all suspected, Lt. Col. Vindman, who was in on the call, allegedly leaked the contents of the call to EC the next day. You may remember this pompous *ss was a witness during the impeachment inquiry. He asked Rep. Devin Nunes to please call him Lt. Col. Vindman.

    The credit for most of what we know about EC goes to Sperry, whose report published on October 30th put his name out there for the first time. Washington insiders, including the mainstream media, have known his identity almost from the get go, yet no one will utter it.”


    “EC contacted at least one of Schiff’s staff members prior to filing his complaint. Sources told Sperry this staffer was Sean Misko. Misko, EC’s colleague/friend was hired by Adam Schiff at around the same time the whistleblower complaint was filed. Additionally, Schiff hired one of EC and Misko’s former colleagues, Abigail Grace, in February 2019.

    He was posted to the NSC in the White House’s West Wing in mid-2017 and “left amid concerns about negative leaks to the media. He has since returned to CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.”

    EC worked with hyper-partisan Ukrainian-American lawyer and activist Alexandra Chalupa in 2016 to dig up dirt on Trump. (Chalupa’s name will become very familiar as this scandal unravels.) The pro-Hillary Chalupa, a former DNC contractor, has worked in the Clinton administration and has held various staff positions for Democratic lawmakers. Sperry wrote: “Documents confirm the DNC opposition researcher attended at least one White House meeting with Ciaramella in November 2015. She visited the White House with a number of Ukrainian officials lobbying the Obama administration for aid for Ukraine.”

    Sperry reported (in his October 2019 piece) that “federal records show Biden’s office invited Ciaramella to an October 2016 state luncheon the vice president hosted for Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi. Other invited guests included Brennan, as well as then-FBI Director James Comey and then-National Intelligence Director James Clapper. (Sperry: Several U.S. officials told RCI that the invitation that was extended to Ciaramella, a relatively low-level GS-13 federal employee, was unusual and signaled he was politically connected inside the Obama White House.)”

    If EC is the individual who filed the whistleblower complaint which launched the impeachment of a U.S. President, then he is not a whistleblower, but a political activist at best, and possibly a criminal. And Adam Schiff and Michael Atkinson, who facilitated this farce, have just become fact witnesses.”


  7. More lies from Schiff and the fake news spreading media.


    “Schiff refers to CBS ‘head on pike’ story, infuriating GOP: ‘Every one of us knows it is not true'”

    “Senate Republicans — including potential swing-voters — expressed outrage Friday after lead House Impeachment Manager Adam Schiff, D-Calif., referred in his closing remarks at President Trump’s Senate impeachment trial to a report that GOP members were told they’d face dire consequences if they voted to convict the president.

    “CBS News reported last night that a Trump confidant said that key senators were warned, ‘Vote against the president and your head will be on a pike.’ I don’t know if that’s true,” Schiff said, while trying to persuade his Senate colleagues to vote with “moral courage” rather than in their political self-interest.

    Several senators went on record objecting to Schiff’s comment.”


    “After listening silently for most of the trial so far, several Republicans reportedly shook their heads and could be heard saying, “That’s not true,” after Schiff made the remark.

    “I hope it’s not true,” Schiff responded before continuing.

    Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, considered another key Republican vote, agreed with Murkowski.

    “Not only have I never heard the ‘head on the pike’ line but also I know of no Republican senator who has been threatened in any way by anyone in the administration,” she told reporters.”


  8. There’s news Chas.

    Today’s the day that Trump, after 3 plus years of lies and innuendo about him, finally gets the chance to a defense and to answer to these baseless charges. The Democrats denied him that for 3 years. And that finally ends today.

    Payback time.


    “LIVE: Trump Defense in Senate Impeachment Trial Starts

    After Democrats wrapped up by throwing insults at Trump and Republican Senators, Trump gets his chance to push back.”


    Joni Ernst leads off with the facts, Trump helped Ukraine, while impeachment managers voted no.


  9. There was a time when Democrats and Republicans could get along. Both sides wanted to do what is best for America. We just disagreed on the best way to do it.
    I think there is now a radical element in the Democratic party that is structurally different from the party we knew. Actually, verging on communism.
    The “Deep State” has always been there. Eisenhower warned us of it.
    However, i think it became powerful and belligerent under Clinton and Obama. Mostly Obama. I think Bill just wanted to be president. Hillary has a lust for power.
    I wish she would jut go away.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. When exposed to the light and given a chance to rebut, the Dems case collapses, because they have none.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.