Chairman Adam Schiff, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence; Chairman Elijah E. Cummings, Committee on White House Oversight; Chairman Eliot L. Engel, House Committee on Foreign Affairs, continue sending carefully worded letters under the guise of ‘subpoenas’ today.  [Main Link Here]

However, you’ll notice in these latest versions they are modifying: (#1) now they actually include attachments that would be “subpoenas”; yet they shift language to ‘subpoena schedules’.  Why?  Because (#2) the letters and subpoenas omit any penalty for non-compliance.  They cannot assign a penalty because the letters do not carry judicial authority.
Obviously Lawfare, instructing Pelosi’s group, realizes the larger American electorate has caught on to the impeachment word games. The “official impeachment inquiry” is all a one-party partisan ruse.  Here’s the issue they cannot overcome.
(more…)

Lots of people, lots of analysis, lots of obfuscation, and lots of pundits stuck deep in the forest losing perspective…..  This interview with Senator Lindsey Graham doesn’t help.  If you are cynical of politicians, avoid the confirmation bias and don’t watch this interview.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi can impeach a president for just about anything, because impeachment is a political process.  The offenses are supposed to entail “treason, bribery or other high crimes or misdemeanors.” However, ultimately a majority House vote is all that’s needed for a technical impeachment. If Speaker Pelosi wants an impeachment vote against President Trump because he’s OrangeManBad, she can do that.  All she technically needs for any impeachment vote is a majority agreement.
Technically, Speaker Pelosi can tear the country apart, and destroy her political party with a brutally obvious political ploy to defend life in the swamp.   As a result Speaker Pelosi can also hold an impeachment vote framing an impeachment resolution, based on manufactured ‘articles of impeachment’, created by hearsay, rumors, gossip and innuendo.
However, a President should not be “removed from office” because some anonymous complaint makes an accusation.  The removal from office is another kettle-o-fish entirely…. Unless, well, unless the Senate concurs with Speaker Pelosi.
Anyone who thinks Senator Lindsey Graham wants to get his hands dirty amid this highly partisan political process is very much mistaken. Watch Graham hoping the entire impeachment operation collapses before it reaches a UniParty Senate… Wait for Barr…. Wait for Durham…. Wait for Horowitz…. Wait, Wait, Wait, bottom line, for 2020:
[wpvideo yRHVmjNS]
(more…)

Chuck Todd is fully vested in defending the overall CIA and FBI efforts in the 2016 election.  Throughout his “reporting” Todd has been one of the biggest defenders of corrupt political behavior by the intelligence apparatus and John Brennan.
Today, amid media marching orders that must be retained, Senator Ron Johnson appears on Meet The Press and Chuck Todd angrily confronts any effort to reveal the corruption.

As customary President Trump reminds everyone about the big picture.
The reason the DC system -writ large- is going bananas is because selling the influence of political office for financial gain is the custom and currency of DC affluence.

In the larger picture the severe reaction from DC is not about Joe Biden, but rather the accepted familiarity of what Joe Biden selling office represents….

Representative Jim Jordan was present during a closed-door interview with U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, Kurt Volker.  Jordan appears on ABC to debate George Stephanopoulos over the carefully selected excerpts, and subsequent spun narrative, by House democrats and media.
Notice ABC’s George Stephanopoulos and Fox’s Chris Wallace repeat the same defensive talking points in a united effort to protect the customary behavior of DC politicians who sell their political influence for personal financial gain.
At the heart of the matter, the selling of influence is the process that must be protected. The process of gaining wealth by selling influence is how/why most DC Senators and corrupt politicians run for the office.  President Trump is spotlighting this; hence the fury of the backlash from those the DC industry.

Representative Chris Stewart (R-Utah) of the House Intelligence Committee debates the insufferable Chris Wallace over the issues of corruption in the swamp.
Obviously the tradition of politicians selling their office for financial gain political hits a nerve with Wallace who must defend the practice in order to defend the swamp.  The level of pearl-clutching pretzel logic by Wallace is off-the-charts…. In essence, all corruption must be accepted while politicians are running for office.

Rudy Giuliani appears on Fox News to discuss the overall Ukraine issue.  Giuliani emphasizes that his investigation was directed toward conduct in 2016, *not* directed toward anything related to the 2020 election.  Mr. Giuliani is a man on a mission.

House Judiciary Rep. John Ratcliffe rightly calls-out the unprecedented sketchy nature of a unilateral impeachment process.  The CIA ‘whistle-blower’ is a material witness in the intelligence committee investigation.  The witness had undisclosed contact with the House intelligence committee prior to filing a complaint.  The Intelligence Community Inspector General did not know about the whistle-blower contact with the committee.
This sketchy assembly of activity makes the HPSCI a fact-witness to their impeachment investigation; a constructed conflict that cannot be allowed. Ratcliffe is correct here:

The inspector general for the Intelligence Community is Michael Atkinson. He is very sketchy.  Atkinson was previously legal counsel for the DOJ-NSD during the ‘stop-Trump’ tenure of John Carlin and Mary McCord. As a result, Atkinson was a participant in the weaponizing of the DOJ-NSD via FISA abuse, along with NSA database exploitation and tenuous FARA legal theories used to target political opposition.
In short, Atkinson seems dirty.  At the very least he hangs around dirty characters.
Today, according to Fox News reporter Catherine Herridge, ICIG Michael Atkinson testified the anti-Trump CIA ‘whistle-blower’, likely to be Michael Barry, did not inform Atkinson that Barry and his legal team already contacted staff working for HPSCI Chairman Adam Schiff when he submitted his complaint.  More sketchy.

After he took the complaint, ICIG Michael Atkinson then changed the rules for the ICIG office allowing a second-hand hearsay complaint to be processed.  Again, sketchy.
According to New York Times reporting earlier this week, the ‘whistle-blower’ (likely CIA operative Michael Barry) first tried to push the hearsay claims to CIA management through a colleague.  Fearing CIA management would not take the gossip seriously “the officer then approached a democrat House Intelligence Committee aide, alerting him to the accusation against Mr. Trump.”  Chairman Schiff never told anyone.
Buckets of sketchy.
(more…)

The Federalist was able to gain a copy of the opening statement delivered to congress by Ambassador Kurt Volker.  The statements made by Volker support the outline put forth by Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani surrounding the initial contact and purposes.
The statement by Volker directly undercuts the narrative spun by HPSCI Chairman Adam Schiff and his attempt to create an impeachment narrative.  Here’s the statement:
[scribd id=428765582 key=key-qZmOFCD6kgjIcMuJBR94 mode=scroll]
.
The outline by Volker supports the original story as told by Rudy Giuliani.
(more…)