December 5th – 2019 Presidential Politics – Trump Administration Day #1050

In an effort to keep the Daily Open Thread a little more open topic we are going to start a new daily thread for “Presidential Politics”. Please use this thread to post anything relating to the Donald Trump Administration and Presidency.


This thread will refresh daily and appear above the Open Discussion Thread.

President Trump Twitter @POTUS / Vice President Pence Twitter @VP

Stephanie Grisham Twitter @StephGrisham45

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

1,266 Responses to December 5th – 2019 Presidential Politics – Trump Administration Day #1050

  1. FPCHmom says:

    Best take –

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Nigella says:

    Okay.. I have no idea how this impeachment is gonna go in the Senate, but I can’t believe that 20 republicans would vote for it… I think we will lose maybe 3.. The usual subjects.. but not 20

    Liked by 4 people

    • Magabear says:

      They won’t, if for no other reason than that they really like being Senators and all the power and perks it provides them. If they vote to remove PDJT, they also vote to remove themselves from office as soon as they come up for reelection.

      Liked by 2 people

      • swimeasy says:

        Exactly Magabear and McConnell is up for re-election. Aren’t Murkowski and Collins also up for re-election?


        • Blue Moon says:

          It doesn’t do any good for McConnell to be up for re-election. No one in our state will run against him except nobodies on the dem side. Any time a repub runs against him they magically drop out not long after declaring. I would love to see Matt Bevin run and would say he might win in KY.


          • OmegaManBlue says:

            Didn’t Bevin just lose getting less votes than other republican candidates? I also remember he tried to primary him before and couldn’t get it done. His chances now would be even worse.


            • An American says:

              OMB, one of the reasons Bevin couldn’t primary McTurtle before was that Rand Paul backed McTurtle. There are a lot of rinos around also, especially in NKY.


        • dd_sc says:

          Murkowski is safe until 2022.
          Same for Collins I think.


      • Ludo says:

        They also know they’re all corrupt to the core and that Trump will strip them of all power and “perks” (briberies).


      • dd_sc says:

        And then they will go to work for the lobbyists that also want Trump gone.


        • Judith says:

          Exactly. These DC hacks were millionaires long before Trump ever came along. With TRILLIONS at at stake now, imagine just how much these globalists are willing “incentivize” the Senate to impeach this president and remove him from power! It’s in the bag.


    • listingstarboard says:

      Can probably add the new senator from Georgia to the “usual subjects”.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Nigella says:

        I’m afraid we can


      • albertus magnus says:

        She will not.

        At some point we have to stop demonizing everyone just because we are unhappy about SOMETHING about them.


        • We’re at war with these people. Your either on Trump’s side or your not, there is no more middle ground.

          Liked by 1 person

          • albertus magnus says:

            There is a far cry from not being on PDJT’s side and being a vote to convict him in the Senate. McConnell is NOT on PDJT’s side; he is NOT a vote to convict.

            We need to think and not blindly hate when there is no evidence to support the hate. What evidence is there for assuming that Senator Loeffler is going to vote to convict PDJT?

            NONE WHATSOEVER.

            Liked by 1 person

            • No, he won’t vote to convict because he needs to keep up the illusion that he’s MAGA but he WILL twist as many “rules” as he possibly can to hurt Trump. Similar to Graham and his inaction as SJC chair. Explain why Mitch won’t allow Trump to make recess appointments. The guy is SWAMP and will remain SWAMP. Trump is the enemy of the swamp. I truly have hatred for these people but it is not blind. Mitch is a SNAKE.


            • Beau Geste says:

              new-senator loffler need to be advised that if ANY housecritters or senators vote to impeach or convict, that many PDJT voters will not vote for ANY GOP candidates, nationwide, including pierre delecto. If PDJT is “convicted”, the country is gone anyway, and no GOP should be left or rewarded. It only takes a few percent. The crooked GOP need to understand that they will be wiped out if they do not actively start to defend the Presidency against a clear coup. “I’ll wait and see-so-I-can-keep-getting-Chamber-of-commerce-money” is not an option.

              It is easy for mcconnell to let ALL GOPe senators know that if they do not actively support and defend PDJT, there will be no slush funds, defacto earmarks, legislation, or funds of any kind for them. That is the purpose of “delayed to the last minute government funding”, to put complete budget power in “leadership”.

              And let the GOP know when the GOP seeks money, that there will be no donations until “impeachment” is over in the senate, but you will continue to support and contribute to the elected President.


    • They won’t need 20 to flip as there’s no rule stating that the entire Senate must be involved. It’s simply 2/3’s of those “present”, whatever that means. Also, Mitch the snitch runs the Senate so all bets are off. Sd has mentioned it before, they most likely have some sort of plan and seeing as 100% of the Senate is corrupted that plan is almost certainly going to harm Trump. From what I can see all but a handful of “Republicans” in Congress don’t want Trump to succeed, he’s putting a stop to their nonsense.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Brutalus says:

        No one’s going to fall for the just the Senators present trick…this thing has so much heat on it after what Dems have put us through the past 3 years…as I said before, if Mitch pushes conviction through, it will be like the Republicans setting off a nuke in their own backyard…the Republican party will cease to exist and a new “Trump” Party will spring up, with MAGA candidates…there’s no way they can pull this off with 95% Republican base support for Trump and this series of nothingburger unhappy meals we’ve been force fed by the Democrats

        Liked by 2 people

      • swimeasy says:

        NOT TRUE. Those not present would delay proceedings until they vote. Fastest way for a Senator to bring negative attention to themselves.


        • I could be wrong but I don’t think that’s how it works. I haven’t seen anything anywhere that says all 100 Senators are required to vote. The rules seem to be up in the air and a bunch of swamp dwellers are creating them as they go so…..


          • TarsTarkas says:

            The rule is 2/3 senators present and voting. No fixed number was mentioned or even desired because the Founders knew more states would be added to the original 13 and soon (Vermont came in in 1791).

            Liked by 1 person

          • permiejack says:

            Yep, 2/3 of all senators must vote yea to impeach. No mention that all 100 need to vote. At least as I read the constitution.

            The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.


            Liked by 1 person

            • Sherri Young says:

              Okay, so if three senators and John Roberts were to meet in the chambers at 11:59pm on New Year’s Eve and vote, two senators voting to convict would remove PDJT from office.

              Would the Senate even have to be in regular session at the time since it would be a trial and John Roberts would be presiding? Wouldn’t Roberts call the shots?


              • Seems that way from what I’ve read but I could have sworn there was a minimum number of Senators needed. I want to say it was a simple majority (51) but don’t quote me on that. Also, why the reference to New Years Eve? Because most people would be busy doing other things?


      • BS

        Don’t be fooled by misinterpretations of the impeachment process. The requirement to convict an official during a Senate trial is 2/3 of those who were sworn in as Senators and took the oath of that OFFICE, not 2/3 of those who happened to show up to vote on the matter at hand.

        Liked by 3 people

        • You are absolutely right.
          Logic dictates that the founders would not tolerate a removal without 2/3 of the ENTIRE BODY!
          Any other interpretation would allow 10 senators to vote, 6 for conviction, 4 against.
          Hence, removal would occur based on just 6 senators out of 100!
          Was that the brilliant, wise concept that the framers had?

          Liked by 1 person

          • Moreover, there is a reason the framers chose the Senate instead of the Supreme Court for this purpose: a rigged trial would have to be voted on by the ENTIRE BODY, and be accounted for politically by being on record and subject to the electorate.
            The Supreme Court, if corrupt, has lifetime appointment.
            So, there was a purpose for the Senate trial.

            Liked by 1 person

          • Sorry for a double response but “Any other interpretation”? Have you seen how these Leftists interpret things? They will twist everything, especially documents from centuries ago and as the snakes running the Senate have the same goal(removing Trump) they will help them get away with it. They’re just making up the rules as they go and no one is stopping them. We’re watching the Left kill America right now, it’s insane.

            Liked by 1 person

            • IMO much of what currently ails America is due to the pretzel-logic and tortured language employed by the Left to achieve their “Cultural Marxist” goals. It seems to be everywhere these days, even among otherwise well intended people.

              Just look at the Constitution AS WRITTEN, then consider how its meaning has been intentionally perverted by individuals with nefarious intentions.

              1st Amendment is currently reinterpreted to mean: “You may say whatever you want as long as I AGREE with you”

              2A: You have the right to Keep and Bear the arms I SAY YOU MAY, and only where I say you can.

              4A officially went in the toilet with the creation of the FISC, as evidenced by the FISAGate abuses recently uncovered

              Even the very RIGHT TO LIFE (the most basic tenet of human existence) went out the window with the arbitrarily adopted definition of life used to pass Roe V Wade/abortion rulings. I can’t help but believe that the Left has led America to the worst possible moral state as a result.

              Sometimes we just have to step back and ask:

              Sure, language DOES change, but does this concept or interpretation make ANY SENSE, when considered in the BIG PICTURE of what the Framers wrote?

              And, in the case of our current impeachment debate, I stand convinced that my interpretation is not only correct, but also there is no documented example of when anyone was convicted and removed by a number of Senators less than 2/3 of those properly elected and sworn to office.


          • The wording was intended to prevent “ambush” convictions by trickery. This way, the 2/3 majority rule could NOT be circumvented by ram-rodding a vote through when it was impossible for a member (or members) to be present.

            Do something that some (here) seem unwilling to do.

            Mentally go back to the time when the Constitution was written, and consider that those were times when the various Colonies (future States) had GREAT DISTRUST and FEAR of one another.

            Imagine (in the Framers’ day and age) a plot where, during a recess, States that were CLOSER to the Capitol were able to quickly convene an “Emergency” (wink wink) trial, and hold a binding vote, BEFORE Senators from more distant States were able to arrive and vote.

            This is not an unreasonable thing imagine NOW, let alone THEN. Surely, THIS may have been WHY the impeachment clause was written in the manner it was, and should be interpreted in the manner I suggest.


          • P.S.:

            At the time when the Constitution was written, there were NO automobiles, airplanes, or other means of rapid transportation.

            How long would it take for a Senator from Georgia to reach the Capitol, as opposed to Senators from NY, PA, DEL, etc?


        • As someone else posted,

          “The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.” -The Constitution

          And from someone else, “The rule is 2/3 senators present and voting. No fixed number was mentioned or even desired because the Founders knew more states would be added to the original 13 and soon (Vermont came in in 1791).”

          Please show me something that says it requires 2/3’s of those who were sworn in as Senators.


          • It clearly says , “…no person shall be convicted without the CONCURRENCE of…”

            Look up the definition of concurrence. It means AGREEMENT OF.


            That passage is saying that at least 2/3 of the officeholders must be present AND in complete agreement.


            • NO. “And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members PRESENT”

              “Present” does not mean “office holders” or “those who were sworn in as Senators and took the oath of that office”. If Mitch tells 40 GOP Senators to stay home plus a few vulnerable Dems like Manchin and there’s only 60 Senators in the chamber then guess how many are “PRESENT”? You’re either full of it or naive to what the Dems/RINOs are capable of.


          • Add:

            It is also (indirectly) saying that if there are FEWER than 2/3 of the nation’s Senators present, then they CANNOT convict, even if all of those present ARE in agreement.

            The notion that the Constitution would allow for less than 2/3 of the Senate to convict and remove an officeholder is either

            1) Innocently mistaken misinterpretation of the Constitution

            2) Intentional fearmongering


            • “Indirectly”. Yeah you’re full of it. I’m simply taking the Constitution literally. You seem to be ignoring or misinterpreting the word “present” which is just plain stupid. Quit lying to yourself.


              • Bless your heart

                I was polite, but in disagreement with you. Now I will tell you that


                1) English must be a second (or third?) language in your household, since you have such a poor grasp on it

                2) YOU are one one those intentional fear mongers I was alluding to.

                In either case, I’m willing to bet that you CAN’T cite a SINGLE Senate conviction which resulted from “guilty” votes of less than 2/3 of the total number of Senators IN OFFICE at the time the vote was held.I

                Go ahead
                I’ll wait for you to research this, and come back with the particular case, the date, and the rally of votes for (and against) conviction.

                It’s OK

                Take your time so you can be precise.


                • Other than the paragraph I posted earlier what does the Constitution say about the Senate removing the President?

                  It’s always funny how everyone on here who reminds me of a liberal is a new user I’ve never seen post before. At least you didn’t accuse me of being Shareblue.


                • First:

                  I noticed that you haven’t cited a case where an official was removed from office by a vote of LESS THAN 2/3 of the Senate

                  Second, though I don’t comment here as often as I once did (one YEAR I was commended for being THE SINGLE MOST FREQUENT CONTRIBUTOR with over 20k comments- feel free to check with ad rem or any other Mod with access to the Treehouse WordPress analytics) I have been a contributor since mid 2012

                  Finally, I was one of the FIRST Treehouse regulars to unabashedly support DJT by responding to criticisms that he was once a registered Dem.

                  My response? “It doesn’t MATTER whether he has a “D” or an “R” after his name. You Either AGREE with what he’s saying, and believe he will keep his promises, or you don’t. It’s JUST THAT SIMPLE. ”

                  To which Sundance (personally) replied:

                  ^^^ “YES! THIS!^^^


                  Maybe it’s YOU who is the newbie?
                  Maybe it’s YOU using questionsble, insulting, Alinsky-like tactics when you can’t provide facts to support your arguments?


    • dwpender says:

      Manchin won’t vote to remove.


    • The Demon Slick says:

      My concern is that by accepting articles of impeachment from the house, the Senate will take the dems turd sandwich and stamp it “official”. That could affect the 3 big court cases where the dems are going fishing for President Trump records – tax returns, grand jury material, and the President’s tax returns. It could also enable the dems to go fishing. Once it’s official, they can subpoena many of President Trump’s privileged communications and documents. Looking for election dirt on the President. Anything that they can leak out and spin.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Chewbarkah says:

      The weight on the Constitution, history, law, and facts are 100% in Trump’s favor. Anyone can have an easy excuse to vote no on the charges, leaving only blind partisans and bitter haters to vote to convict. That means most of the Dems and Romney. The danger for Trump is that ruthless Republicans will try to extort promises from him in exchange for their support.

      Liked by 1 person

      • jrapdx says:

        You’re no doubt right about Senators voting “no” on removing PT from office. Though I think Romney is too much a pipsqueak to defy Republican leadership, so will go along and vote “no” too.

        As far as “extorting promises” from PT, remember the President has leverage due to very high level of support among Republicans. He also has vast sums of campaign cash to contribute to those Senators facing tough reelection races. IMO outcome is likely a draw, neither Senators or PT will gain advantage after Senate trial, situation will be status quo.


    • Effem says:

      I find it highly unlikely the Senate would turn on DJT. I, for one (and I know others), would proceed to vote Democratic just to expedite the complete destruction of the Republican Party…it’d be the only way to fix it. Lots of Senate jobs would be lost.


    • linda4298 says:

      I don’t believe we will lose any, and pick up a few dems.


    • Robert Smith says:

      I generally agree with you, but if they just vote “Yes”, Trump is gone. The DeepState has always been a do first and dare people to do something about it.


  3. Sporty says:

    All the Dems are coming apart today. They know their A$$es are cooked soon. Please don’t despair my fellow Patriots.

    Liked by 12 people

  4. Reserved55 says:

    Liked by 3 people

    • LOL

      Eric Holder.

      The ONLY Attorney General (and first Presidential Cabinet Member) to ever be found “In Contempt of Congress”

      I guess THAT tidbit didn’t offend the Constitutional sensibilities of those Leftist ideologues


  5. Battleship Wisconsin says:

    A key question which must now be addressed is whether or not early public release of the classified Spygate documents during the course of the post-impeachment Senate trial would legally prejudice any criminal cases brought later against the Spygate perps.

    An obvious truth should be recognized. Once articles of impeachment against President Trump have been passed by the House of Representatives and the follow-on Senate trial commences, the president and his own White House legal team cannot defend him successfully in the court of public opinion without the full and complete cooperation of the Senate leadership.

    A defense in depth mounted by Senate Republicans and hopefully led by Senator Rand Paul could turn the tables on the coup plotters and turn the accusers into the accused — assuming Mitch McConnell allows that kind of highly aggressive defense to be mounted.

    Issue subpoenas to all of the Spygate perpetrators as witnesses in the Senate trial. Put them all under oath. Carefully note if anything they say contradicts known facts and refer them to the DOJ for prosecution for lying under oath if they slip up. Let the Democrats suffer the political consequences if all of the Spygate perps take the 5th Amendment in the course of the Senate trial.

    That said, it must also be said that one way or another, it is imperative that the Spygate perps be criminally charged for their role in the coup against the president.

    As long as early release of the classified Spygate documents is done in response to a Senate subpoena issued in the course of a post impeachment trial of the president, it is my guess that criminal cases brought later against the Spygate perps would not be legally prejudiced by that early release.

    Not that the Spygate perp’s lawyers wouldn’t try to make that argument in court; they will. If anything is certain, it’s that as the oncoming Battle of Political Gettysburg evolves, any and all lawfare tactics will be used by one side or the other to gain a political or legal advantage.

    Repeating my first question:

    Would early public release of the classified Spygate documents during the course of the Senate trial be legally prejudicial to any criminal cases brought later against the Spygate perps, if that release was done in response to a subpoena from the Senate?


    • bertdilbert says:

      At this point, I would not call a release “early”.

      Liked by 6 people

    • jx says:

      I think Horowitz will whitewash as much as possible and Barr will decline the rest.

      Liked by 2 people

      • CM-TX says:

        Of course he will, that’s his job. Act as a buffer. Avoid criminal accountability wherever possible for those caught. Lie if you gotta.

        Liked by 1 person

      • I agree 100%

        No one of any significance will ever be charged, tried, or convicted for Spygate/FISAGate related crimes. In the end, those who let them go will rationalize their actions by saying “It Was In The Nation’s Best Interest”

        that’s how they ALWAYS try to justify maintaining the status quo of the corrupt DC Swamp.


    • vikingmom says:

      “assuming Mitch McConnell allows that kind of highly aggressive defense to be mounted….”

      This, IMHO, is the main question hanging over this whole process. IF McConnell decides to go all in and protect himself and his wife (who are very dirty with money from China) then he will take the “elder statesman” approach and hogtie the President from defending himself in the Senate. IF, on the other hand, President Trump lets it be known that he will take them down with him if he goes, then expect the Senate to be allowed to call all the witnesses they need in order to expose the majority of the Coup players. (I still, sadly, think that Hillary and Obama will be allowed to skate…just because they know too much on too many people and no one in the Congress wants to risk their lives that much!)


      • Zimbalistjunior says:

        As has been stated before, remember that the a president is a street fighter if he wishes to be.
        Any ‘oral deal’ he has or would make with Rino or other black hats can be abrogated if he wishes.
        He doesn’t need this crap. He is here to drain the swamp.
        Let them all beware.

        Liked by 3 people

      • trialbytruth says:

        Or he will be trying to cut a separate deal with POTUS.

        Worked for the Navy Secretary. Oh wait


      • Battleship Wisconsin says:

        vikingmom says: “…… assuming Mitch McConnell allows that kind of highly aggressive defense to be mounted….” This, IMHO, is the main question hanging over this whole process. …

        Yes. That is very definitely the larger main question. The Democrats are calculating that the Senate Republicans will not mount an all-out, no holds barred defense of the President in ways that might expose their own Senate colleagues to accountability for their participation in the coup.

        Once the House passes articles of impeachment, Trump will not be removed from office by a Senate trial. However, counting on Senate Republicans not to pursue an aggressive defense of the president in ways which also expose everyone’s dirty laundry is the biggest partisan political gamble ever made in American history.

        Liked by 1 person

        • vikingmom says:

          And let’s hope that their gamble does NOT pay off!! I think the President has done a good job convincing Lindsay Graham that it would be in his best interest, for a LOT of reasons, to make sure that the Senate trial exposes the coup completely, in exchange for keeping him and his benefactor Songbird McCain out of the line of direct fire!


    • freespeechfanatic says:

      “Senate Republicans… could turn the tables on the coup plotters and turn the accusers into the accused — assuming Mitch McConnell allows that kind of highly aggressive defense to be mounted.”

      Not in a million years McConnell will allow this. In what way does this sound anything like the GOP?


    • Zoe says:

      I don’t think that is how it works. The senate is the jury. They don’t mount a defense the President mounts a defense. The house is the prosecutor. Probably lawfare layers would be the prosecutors. But the senate is the jury only.


      • Battleship Wisconsin says:

        Zoe, upon reading Linda’s link below, you are correct. The defense attorneys in the Senate trial will likely be Republican members of the House.

        If that is how it is going to be done, then the question remains, will the House Republicans on the defense team in the trial be allowed under the Senate’s rules to call any and all witnesses they believe to be pertinent to the question of innocence or guilt.

        One could suspect that the articles of impeachment will be drafted in such a way as to minimize the kinds of witnesses which the Republicans could subpeona in the Senate trial.

        For example, in regard to the Russia collusion narrative, the Democrats might word the articles of impeachment in a way which excludes the Spygate perpetrators from becoming witnesses in the Senate trial by focusing only on the question of obstruction of justice, as opposed to the alleged collusion itself.


  6. Ausonius says:

    It is quite obviously not being sufficiently recognized nor appreciated among Americans that a bureaucratic and legislative coup d’etat – sponsored by Soros and other billionaires – is occurring right before our eyes, that the perpetrators are still on the offensive, and that the plotters may very likely walk away from their conspiracy successful, unjailed, and in power, or unsuccessful, unjailed, and therefore at large and ready to try again.

    If President Trump is chased from office, or worse, if he is imprisoned for completely impossible and invented crimes, who will lead a Conservative Resistance against this overturning of Law, Liberty, and Logic?

    The sans-culottes are on the march, they are giddy with a lust for burying our president, and as they come closer to success, their mania will only increase.

    How will they be stopped?

    Liked by 2 people

    • jeans2nd says:

      Pres Trump will never be removed from office. Schitt has already stated that Pence is their next shampeachment target, which would leave Pelosi as President.

      McConnell would be hung from the rafters, figuratively speaking, by every Kentuckian should McConnell ever allow that to happen.
      Rest easy

      Liked by 2 people

      • F D says:

        Pelosi chooses Hillary as her V P. That’s my take.

        Liked by 1 person

      • I agree jeans2nd.

        Pres Trump will never be “chased from office”.

        As Zimbalistjunior posted above Pres Trump is a street fighter so to speak.

        These fussy politicians have never met an opponent like him in all of their political lifetime.

        They do not know how to defeat him or even begin to fight against him successfully.

        Yesterday was a very bad day for the Democrats, very bad.

        As they move forward in their phony baloney impeachment process every single step they take forward is a disaster for them.

        The closer they move toward impeachment the happier our President seems to get.

        He is not pretending he is really smiling and jolly about all of this for some reason.

        President Trump really can not wait for the House to sent it to the Senate.

        I wonder why?

        Liked by 1 person

      • InAz says:

        I would hope that every citizen who loves America and the Constitution would hang all the Congress and the Senate from rafters.

        Liked by 1 person

    • maybe another reason they are doing this now……..they assume that we public folks will be busy and distracted with the Christmas Season…….maybe they even think rotten weather will keep us home. ……I think that dog is a long way off hunting. In all this, I believe that the dims have sadly miscalculated the patriots in this country.

      Liked by 1 person

  7. jx says:

    As if Karlan wasn’t enough:

    Noah Feldman, another of the Democrat’s “unbiased” legal experts…


    • Reserved55 says:



      • MR52 says:

        “Patronizing Trump voters would also be a mistake — practically, rather than morally. The risk of condescension is especially great given polls that suggest Trump is doing better with white voters who don’t have a college degree than other Republican candidates have done. It will be tempting to think — as some have already argued — that Trump voters have been hoodwinked by a skilled salesman.”

        Man, this moon bat elitism is unreal. I hope Mr. Soap Rope has a rectum problem including not getting his head unstuck from his butt.

        Liked by 2 people

      • California Joe says:

        These people like Feldman, as a group, are anarchists and always have been no matter what country they were in. There’s no other logical explanation for this consistent behavior!


  8. linda4298 says:

    Liked by 3 people

  9. Zippy says:

    LOL, the insanity is great with 2019 politics:

    “You’re A Damn Liar”: Biden Lashes Out At ‘Fat’ Voter Over Hunter-Burisma Question, Challenges To Push-Up Contest

    “You’re a damn liar, man,” Biden clapped back. “That’s not true. And no one has ever said that.”

    “Look, the reason I’m running is because I’ve been around a long time and I know more than most people know. And I can get things done, that’s why I’m running.”

    “And you wanna check my shape, let’s do pushups together man, let’s run, let’s do whatever you want to do, let’s take an IQ test. OK?”

    “Number two, no one has said my son has done anything wrong and I did not on any occasion, and no one has ever said it…”

    To which the man replies, “I didn’t say you were doin’ anyting wrong.”

    “You said I set up my son to work at an oil company, isn’t that what you said? Get your words straight, Jack.”

    (The man said it was a gas company).

    “You don’t have anymore backbone than Trump,” the man retorts.

    Liked by 3 people

  10. burnett044 says:

    President Trump seems to believe he has 95% backing by the Repubs…
    I hope he does ,but I do not trust em at all…only a small handful have shown me they have a spine..
    and that handful fought hard…
    if the Trial does get to the Senate ,it indeed would be a grand time to open a can of worms..
    I guess we will see how deep the deep state is and how wide spread the Uni-party is.


    • That 95% poll is the public, not the “Republicans” in Congress. It seems to be the opposite there.

      Liked by 2 people

    • cboldt says:

      It’s 95% of the electorate that identifies with the GOP. The elected membership is 95% deep state, and is looking out only for reelection.

      Liked by 1 person

    • FL_GUY says:

      President Trump knows how to deal with slimeballs and win. He’s got a 40 year plus track record of doing so against EVIL, corrupt people. He just doesn’t tip his hand before he strikes. He lets the enemy move first then goes in to destroy them. As a text book, e.g. REAL GENIUS, I have no doubt President Trump will destroy these people when the time is right. Remember Andrew Jackson’s orders? “Don’t fire until you see the whites of their eyes!” Well, remember how that battle turned out? Whose pic is hanging on the wall in the Oval Office? Just sayin’

      Liked by 4 people

    • Dekester says:

      52% today in Rasmussen and climbing…


  11. StanH says:

    Old Slo-Joe and Piglosi leading the democrat charge off the cliff. Their protected status is being breached by their own hubris. The more they are cornered the crazier and sloppier they will become. I’ve never seen these entitled pols with their feathers singed and losing the narrative when they control a 98% of the MSM. It tells how utterly inept they really are, they can’t even win a fixed game. This all great stuff.

    “If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs…” R. Kipling

    This is the first line of a poem “If” by Rudyard Kipling about growing and becoming a man. Our fearless President Trump exemplifies the moral of the poem completely. Thanks God for putting forward our Great President Donald J Trump. The right man at the right place ate the right time.

    Liked by 3 people

  12. Low life people such as biden and piglosi can’t think when overly angry and filled with hate, what little brain matter they have left after sucking down liquor WE have paid for the past 30 years is taxed easily, they get riled and since they have no practice at being challenged by anyone in the past 30 years they flail about and lose composure rapidly, exposing the lack of character and poor upbringing they no doubt were subject to……..

    Liked by 2 people

  13. Patience says:

    In other (ahem) news………………
    Anyone see the video clip of the wrapped in the yellow garbage bag look? OMG!


  14. burnett044 says:

    lol…..Joe calling voters fat and too old to vote for him… goodness the man is nuts..
    the sad thing to watch are those clapping their hands for him…amazing

    Liked by 7 people

  15. CoHoBo says:

    Watch the IG FISA report get dropped tomorrow.

    Liked by 5 people

  16. lawrencepaul1 says:

    Elizabeth Warren Unveils Plan To End Climate Change By Performing Authentic Rain Dance

    Liked by 5 people

  17. citizen817 says:

    Defensive Creepy Joe can’t handle the question. Challenges man to a push-up contest.

    Liked by 2 people

  18. Patience says:

    Swamp Draining is in progress
    >Keep talking Nancy…………….. Liar, Liar…. House on FIRE!


  19. FPCHmom says:

    Here is another close-up angle where he clearly calls him fat Bill.

    Liked by 1 person

  20. Reserved55 says:


    Liked by 1 person

  21. Elle says:

    We won the American Revolution because the British army was easily ambushed walking down wooded lanes in their bright red coats. I’m sure many British soldiers were aware that they needed to change the way they operated, but the leadership was unable to adjust.

    The fight against our Republic today is equivalent to Red Coats marching down the lane with GPS tracking devices, but it is our leaders who refuse to employ the tools we have readily available to save our republic. God Save America. The good America. The one worth saving.

    This is just painful to watch.

    Liked by 4 people

  22. Zippy says:

    The 10 most important revelations to expect from the Russia probe FISA report
    John Solomon – DECEMBER 4, 2019

    Liked by 1 person

  23. gingergal says:

    The timing of this impeachment scam is interesting, considering the FISA report will be released Monday.

    Liked by 1 person

  24. Zippy says:

    What’s Happening with the Iran Protests?


  25. k4jjj says:

    The idea that a lot of U.S. Senators would avoid being present for a presidential impeachment conviction vote is laughable.

    How would they answer this, “Senator, what were you doing more important than a historic Senate vote to remove a popular U.S. President?”


  26. Reserved55 says:

    Good thread on Pedo Nader’s funneling foreign money to Hillary.

    Liked by 1 person

  27. TrumpPatriot says:


    All roads lead to Pelosi. Plotting with Lawfare to change the rules of the house. Committee rules being changed and she colluded with Schiff to run roughshod over the Intel committee hearings. She has now made the unprecedented move of taking over the Judiciary committee and ordering the advancement of the impeachment. And, look backwards to see where they dropped negative stories on V-Pres. Pence.

    The populace will more clearly understand the end goal and President Trump’s being railroaded when they realize the goal for Pelosi is first American female President. Go on offense.


  28. Nick the Deplorable says:

    I just found my new candidate. This is my district.

    Liked by 1 person

  29. Reserved55 says:

    Liked by 1 person

    • FofBW says:

      Pelosi and her handlers must be going nuts that for the first time the working class (aka, Deplorables) are not buying their gaslighting.

      It is called denial and off the cliff they go.

      Liked by 3 people

  30. FPCHmom says:


  31. islandpalmtrees says:


    First both were members of the 2016 Gang-Of-Eight
    Second, they withheld information from the FISA Court that would have proved the innocents of Carter Page
    Third, withholding such evidence by a federal officer is a crime.
    Forth, if Pelosi and Schiff are indicted they wont be calling for impeachment on anyone!
    Fifth, calling for a impeachment is a great distraction from your own crimes.

    “Jarrett and Hannity stressed that “exculpatory evidence” was withheld from the FISC which would have shown that Carter Page and another Trump campaign adviser, George Papadopoulos, were “telling the truth” when they said there was no coordination between the campaign and the Kremlin.”

    Liked by 1 person

  32. Troublemaker10 says:

    Liked by 2 people

  33. mark says:

    Maybe it’s a good time and idea to replace VP Pence. You know like an insurance policy just in case you’re impeached 3 years into your 8 years of Presidency.


  34. dogsmaw says:

    Liked by 1 person

  35. bleep21k says:

    3:55 pm, brook baldwin, cnn reporting that AG Barr issued some sort of “veiled” threat to communities that protest the police…(ONE GUESS which communities – GO!)

    Sooo…with the IG report about to be released and AG Barr being a related “spokesperson” to said report…well HIS credibility is very questionable…/s

    “Orangeman BAD and his AG – BAD!”


  36. Patience says:

    Quid pro quo Joe is a loser, a liar and a mouthy bully.
    >Any portable bleachers in his bus?


  37. burnett044 says:

    when the people and government crash looks like this…

    please do not think it can not happen here….that would be a mistake.

    Liked by 1 person

  38. David mitchell says:

    The only marbles Nancy has left are the blue ones in the necklace she was wearing today, and those looked pretty loose on the string…

    Said it earlier—we should know everyone who went on her Madrid boondoggle, how must is cost the US taxpayer and an itemized list of booze consumed on the way there, while they were there, and on the way back. None of this is classified info, and the WH could get it with one phone call to SECDEF. Get the info, release it and let Empress Nancy defend it…

    Liked by 1 person

    • Lucille says:

      Lapis Lazuli…and depending upon where the queen purchased it (say, Tiffany), likely around $10,000 upwards for a 20 inch, 8mm, high quality stone necklace with 18k clasp. LOL!


      • David mitchell says:

        Lucille, thanks for the additional info…she does live like an Empress. She flys home to the West Coast all the time on military air, carting family and friends along on a well appointed passenger jet, with a well stocked bar. Even had the sense of self importance to demand jets that can make the trip without refueling. Stopping over in fly over country for gas is beneath her…


        • Lucille says:

          Nancy has a lot of choice jewelry and I’d imagine nary a piece was purchased at the Jewelry Television Network. She’s been spoiled all her life and likely believes it’s her due as a member of the WDC elite ruling class to be coddled and catered to.

          A lot of heavy praying needs to be done between now and the November 2020 election to make sure the Dems are 1) thrown out of House majority; 2) that our Senate holds with the President; 3) that President Trump, the people’s champion, is reelected. Please, God, yes!


  39. dallasdan says:

    Not more than a few months ago, even weeks, many believed the impeachment gambit was a ridiculous joke that would be never be brought to a vote in the House.

    Now, here we are, a trial in the Senate is looming, and the same chatter assures us with certainty that there is no way 20 RINO/NeverTrumpers will collaborate with the Dems to convict and remove the President. We will see.

    The Deep state, msm included, has been consistently successful in isolating the President, defaming him, stalling/killing his legislative agenda, and protecting the coup co-conspirators. The possibility of a guilty verdict in the impeachment trial is very real, IMO.

    I anticipate the prosecutorial angle will be entirely related to Ukraine, thereby making all the bogus Mueller-related Russia garbage, proven to be just that, irrelevant and likely to be ruled inadmissible/irrelevant by Roberts as evidence/testimony in the President’s defense.

    IMO, the trial outcome has an increasing potential to become a coin-flip.

    This year, the Grinch will steal Christmas.


  40. Troublemaker10 says:

    Biden rallies are so much fun.


  41. Bryan Alexander says:

    Since everyone is opining on the Senate voting on Articles of Impeachment, let me give you something to think about.
    1. We know that the Democrats have resorted to using the Intelligence Agencies to spy on the Republicans. John Brennan got caught having the CIA hack the computers/computer network of the US Senate. Obama used bogus information and used the World’s Best Technical Surveillance agencies for surveillance on political candidate Donald Trump and his campaign.
    2. We know that politically, they are fully committed to taking Trump out. FULLY COMMITTED. See point #1. They should be going to prison for misuse of the NSA, CIA and FBI.
    Why would you think that they haven’t got 20 Senators ready to blackmail? They tell these Senators that if they don’t support a YES on Impeachment, they will leak damaging information that will sink them politically and likely send them to prison. You don’ t think so? With a willing media on their side, they can set the narrative and sell the bad news.

    I still say that President Trump will have to stop this with fully declassifying ALL of the Russia Hoax information. He will have to burn the Brits who helped. And he will have to prosecute several high profile political leaders to get the message across. And will have to do this BEFORE the Senate votes.

    Liked by 2 people

    • islandpalmtrees says:

      Declassification must be done.


    • lotbusyexec says:

      And where is the one man or woman with a set?– To call out the blackmailer(s) and expose the scheme would automatically make them immune from the “crime(s)” they may have committed. Where is the hero who could expose their blackmail methods and turn the tide against them. I am looking for a hero. Will someone PLEASE stand up, our country and way of life depends on it.


    • KMD says:

      But, if you will…
      take that EXACT argument, with one minor change. Let’s assume that the coup plotters have lost the helm of the bastardized IC community…

      What if the “good guys” are actually in control?
      And have been since POTUS took office?
      What if the “good guys” now have the goods on ALL of the crooked congress worms?

      We’ve all been witness, time & again, to how President & ‘Patriots Inc.’ have been mopping the floor with globalists for the last three years. Do you believe he’s been wingin’ it, this whole time?
      Or, he’s just been lucky at systematically dismantling their phony accords& bogus trade deals?

      Do you think President does not already KNOW who’s crooked in congress, by now?

      You think Mc Turtle doesn’t KNOW he’s fixing to be made soup of, if he balks on impeachment?

      Only one alternative allows McTurtle to come out smelling a rose, and that’s to stand with the Republican Party.
      Beyond that, a spineless, dirty crook will always seek self preservation, so he will seek the shelter & comfort the Republican Party has provided for years.

      Take a deep breath, have faith & pray.
      I believe one of President Trump’s great ‘people skills’ is his willingness to allow an opponent a reasonable alternative to being blown right outta da water in a direct confrontation. IMHO, McTurtle KNOWS that Potus KNOWS he’s a crook, yet Potus will allow him to come out as the “hero” of the Republican Party if he stands strong against impeachment…

      Ask yourself, if you were a crooked Senator, which option would you take?
      The one where ya get voted out of office, shamed and ostracized for life?
      Or the option where you go down in history as being integral to saving our Republic???

      Why do you think Potus keeps reminding EVERYONE of his Party approval rating?

      Use logic.


  42. Lucille says:

    “Developing: Passport for Mysterious Maltese Professor Joseph Mifsud Turns up in Portugal – Deep State Spy Mifsud Said he Was in Fear for His Life”
    By Jim Hoft, December 5, 2019, As reported earlier by Joe Hoft

    “All Roads lead to Brennan”

    Liked by 1 person

  43. islandpalmtrees says:


  44. burnett044 says:

    I can say I do NOT know what will happen…hell,I am not Noteradumdass….
    what i do not I am not going to put on my dancing shoe just yet nor will i preach doom and gloom..
    what I do not is i will change what i can..and deal with what ever happen the best i can..
    I will and have been preparing for what ever…
    but be sure i will not panic….


  45. burnett044 says:

    know ,not…not


  46. LULU says:

    Meanwhile, while Mother Pelosi prays and the Dems spin their wheels:

    BREAKING: Justice IG Horowitz has 104 criminal or administrative investigations of alleged misconduct related to FBI employees open as of Sept. 30, according to new OIG report. The criminal investigations involve “serious allegations of official misconduct.”
    — Paul Sperry (@paulsperry_) December 5, 2019


Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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