“Barack Obama: Women Are ‘Indisputably’ Better Than Men”

We’ve been predicting for years that Michelle O’ would run in 2020.

Is this their lead-in to that announcement?

We reported mid-November that Ukrainian aid was handled exactly according to the law passed by Congress, mandating those funds released as Ukraine actions were certified.

Now, there’s more information on how the Democrats created their next HOAX, simply by delaying and obscuring certain procedural activities while condemning the President.

“Adam Schiff’s $391 Million Dollar Lie” details how Pres. Trump actually increased aid to the Ukraine…but that increase needed a Congress sign-off that delayed funding.

House Republicans need to hold this information up for the Nation to see…

…NOW.

Once the Democrats are exposed, it blows away the ‘quid’ argument in their abuse-of-power ‘quid-pro-quo’ SHAMpeachment charge…thus deflating the obstruction charge.

Pssssss…what you’re hearing is the air going out of their impeach balloon.

FakeNews got some ‘splainin to do…at the Federalist yesterday: “Horowitz: FBI’s FISA Applications Against Carter Page Relied ‘Entirely’ On Steele’s Sources”

(For 3 years, FakeNews dismissed claims that FISA apps were dossier-reliant.)

For that matter…IG Horowitz has some ‘splainin to do as well. (He of the ‘no documentary evidence of political bias’ notoriety tried to backtrack a ‘dossier’ slip.)

In a brief moment yesterday, Horowitz dropped his drawers, exposing his herculean (and partisan) effort of damage control for Hillary, Obama, and their Democrat cohort.

Under oath, he testified (verbatim) “The FISA applications relied entirely on information from the Steele… from the primary sub-source’s reporting to support the allegation that Page was coordinating with the Russian government on 2016 U.S. presidential election activities. However, the FBI did not share this information from department lawyers, and it was therefore omitted from the last two renewal applications,” Horowitz said.”

Notice how he just managed to stop himself referring to ‘the Steele DOSSIER‘? But, understand, when Horowitz refers to ‘the primary sub-source’s reporting’ that means precisely the Steele dirt-dossier Hillary and Democrats procured through FusionGPS.

We know, and Mueller reported, the dossier was an unsubstantiated hoax. Democrats might not admit that, but their special counsel partisans couldn’t indict based on its lies.

In one sentence, Horowitz just exposed

• FBI fraudulent abuse of FISA apps;
• his partisan leanings (by trying to avoid use of the word ‘dossier’);
• the pivotal involvement of the Democrat-funded hoax-dossier…
• with Hillary Clinton and Barack ‘The One’ Obama paving the way.

Now, that’s a 4-bagger…small wonder Democrats desperately push impeachment.

IC Insp Gen’l Horowitz’s report, page 368-369: “…the (FISA) renewal applications…(item 11) Omitted information from Department attorney Bruce Ohr about Steele and his election reporting, including that ( 1) Steele’s reporting was going to Clinton’s presidential campaign and others, (2) Simpson was paying Steele to discuss his reporting with the media, and (3) Steele was “desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being the U.S. President””

(‘Simpson’ is one of the owners of FusionGPS; ‘Steele’ is author of the dirt dossier.)

Hillary Clinton’s campaign, and the DNC, through lawyers, were paying FusionGPS.

But, you know…no documentary evidence of bias…

RIGHT

So the IG report acknowledges that

• the FISA apps relied on the Steele dossier to justify spy warrants;
• the FISA apps were riddled with 51 violations that biased the process;
• Steele’s oppo-research employer FusionGPS paid him to talk it up with media…

…but ‘no documentary evidence of political bias’ existed?

Bogus FISA apps are ‘documents’.

The dirt-dossier is a ‘document’.

The author of the dirt-document being paid to talk to media is ‘documented’.

What are we missing here?

Horowitz exposed it today…he emphasized under Senate questioning the initiation of the Trump investigation had no documentary evidence of political bias motivation, but when the FISA abuses come into play, he said, that’s a different ‘challenging’ story.

Stay tuned.

Those claiming impeachment ‘a political process and not a criminal process’ are wrong.

‘High Crimes & Misdemeanors’, and ‘conviction’ are very much criminal standards.

(See Art. II, section4)

What is a ‘political process’ involves determining standards that an impeachment-bound congressional body must consider when question of invoking impeachment comes up.

Daring to press an impeachment against the political winds of public opinion can be a very hazardous undertaking which could jeopardize a political career of the unwise.

But the charges to justify that act is tied to criminality. PERIOD. FULL STOP.

A more complex argument supporting our position is posed at the AmericanThinker.

Yeah, sure…nothing to see here…move along. As reported at johnsolomonreports.com: “Just how bad was the FBI’s Russia FISA? 51 violations and 9 false statements”

• 9 FALSE statements by the FBI; plus,
• 9 other FBI assertions unsupported by evidence; plus
• 33 other violations of Woods procedure to ensure accurate, reliable information

51 violations, 9 involving false statements, 9 more unsubstantiated assertions…

…how would you like to be an FBI target, based on those standards?

But, that ain’t all: “So Obama knew all along about the FBI bid to spy on his rival”

As reported at AmericanThinker.com: “Today, Obama’s claim is in tatters. Julie Kelly of the Federalist found references within the new I.G. report that Obama was briefed on the gamy investigation and knew all about it all along.” (u/l, bold emphasis added)

But that’s not what Obama said back then.

“I do not talk to the attorney general about pending investigations. I do not talk to FBI directors about pending investigations[.] … I guarantee that there is no political influence in any investigation conducted by the Justice Department or the FBI — not just in this case, but in any case. FULL STOP. PERIOD.” (Obama, pre-election 2016.)

The banner under the FBI shield cites ‘Fidelity, Bravery, Integrity’.

Yeah, right. With that motto, and any guarantee you receive from The One…Barack Hussein Obama…we suggest holding onto your wallet, and locking all your doors.

It just keeps getting uglier, folks.

“Just Last Week DOJ Indicted 8 for Funneling MILLIONS in Foreign Donations to Adam Schiff and Democrats… But Schiff Has Gall to Accuse Trump of Using Foreign Nation to Cheat?”

Does seem rather odd…no?

Democrats are backed into a corner – for them, impeach is just another word for…

…nothing left to lose.

In 2018 Biden actually bragged, on video, about getting a Ukraine prosecutor fired who was investigating corrupt practices at a Ukrainian company, which involved his son.

Biden’s video-brag occurred over a year before the new Ukraine leader was elected, which then puts him squarely and justifiably in play as deserving of investigation.

But a larger picture developing ensnares Hillary, Kerry, Pelosi, DNC, and even Obama.

(Hillary’s CrowdStrike is Ukrainian-founded; Pelosi’s/Kerry’s kids are tied to Ukrainian corruption as well; Democrats are on record dealing with Ukrainians asking for dirt on Donald Trump; Obama’s meetings with Ukrainians and aides is under review.)

The Democrats revealed SHAMpeachment articles as revolving around abusing power regarding a 2019 call for Ukraine to probe corruption…but that invites TOTAL exposure.

After all, if asking for corruption to be investigated is impeachable, then revealing actual corruption that did occur, and (maybe) still occurring, is an acceptable Trump defense.

Some corruption involved Biden, a Democrat 2020 presidential candidate, and is also justifiably worth investigating…regardless of ‘political gain’ mewling from Democrats.

President Trump is well within his rights to investigate corruption within foreign nations that receive American aid in the form of taxpayer dollars. Biden brought this on himself.

As for the other SHAMpeachment charge – it’s bogus as well.

Obstruction of Congress? More like ‘obstruction of Democrats’ – this is a completely bald-faced partisan effort…they’re complaining of investigating THEIR corruption.

Do the Democrats really want this level of corruption exposed? We doubt it.

It’s not about impeachment…their efforts are about stopping corruption probes, or at least delegitimizing the investigation, portraying it as merely a ‘political gain’ ploy.

Our guess is the SHAMpeachment vote loses narrowly when brought to a vote in the House, after its exploitation fails to gain traction despite inevitably huge media efforts.

They have no other way to play this…literally, nothing left to lose.

Stay tuned.

Reading an article at Human Events (“Adam Schiff’s Impeachment Report Exonerates President Trump”) an interesting contradiction is suddenly apparent…

…the President’s being harassed for what Democrats say he was thinking…yet seem oblivious to the fact that, absent any proof, an opposite interpretation is just as valid. 

Last we knew, Democrats hadn’t cornered the ESP/mind-reading market.

Any baseless Democrat argument that assigns bad intent to the President’s thoughts is no more valid than an alternate Republican argument that good intent was involved.

The only factor that changes this equation is PROOF…lacking in their effort so far.

There will be many opinions written about the Democrat SHAMpeach effort, with all the little ‘gotchas’ proving this or disproving that, but the HUGE gotcha remains ‘proof’…

…or the lack thereof.

And – absent proof – any claim of what the President thought is irrelevant.

“Dem Rep. Green: ‘No Limit’ to How Many Times We Can Try to Impeach Trump”

We can think of a Big Limit – elections.