The Nadler Show Begins YAWN!

In case you’re bored with the whole impeachment thing, don’t worry. I’ve got you covered. When we last left Adam Schiff, he was seen trying to vote to pass on to Jerry Nadler at the House Judiciary Committee, the recommendation for impeachment. Of course, this one wasn’t in front of the cameras. Schiff’s vote was taken behind closed doors with no TV present.

In the meantime, Nadler was getting ready for his big day Wednesday. And to help bore you to tears, he brought in four liberal law professors, one from each corner of the country. I guess he figured that’d help. It didn’t. It was as dry as two week old toast. Unfortunately for Nadler, he didn’t include Catharine MacKinnon, the uber-liberal feminist law professor from the University of Michigan. If you don’t remember, MacKinnon is the one that calls all sexual intercourse “rape”. That could have been a turning point in this whole impeachment deal. Rape certainly IS a crime! And if all sex is rape, and we know Trump has had many dalliances, then he MUST be guilty of rape, right? Well, that’d be her way of thinking!

Instead, we got a first year law class in impeachment. Yes, it was boring. No, we didn’t learn anything. And no, it didn’t move the needle in any direction. What’s funny about all of this is that the conclusion is foregone. Is there really anybody in America that feels that Democrats aren’t going to impeach Trump? Is there anyone out there that doesn’t think he’s going to get exonerated once the trial phase starts in the Senate? And is there anyone out there that really thinks this is going to help the Democrats in 2020 and beyond?

I saw Republican majority leader, Kevin McCarthy the other day outline why the whole thing was a charade, and he pretty well nailed it. Nancy Pelosi had outlined there were three key things that had to happen in order for her to move forward with impeachment. What was funny was none of the three areas have been met. In fact, one of the keys was that impeachment had to be “bi-partisan”, which it wasn’t since more Democrats voted against the impeachment inquiry (2) than Republicans voting for it (zero).

In the end, there really isn’t a way out of the woods for the Democrats. Oh, they’ll try and spin it that there was a “bribe”, and that will be one of the articles of impeachment. But when both parties (Trump and Ukrainian president, Zelenskiy) have said there was no pressure, no quid pro quo, and no bribe, it’s going to be tough to actually prove the charge. A few Dems have suggested censorship of Trump as a way to get around impeachment, but that’s being shot down by pretty much everybody in leadership. No, the Dems have once again over-played their hand on this one. The egg on their face is going to be long lasting and tough to get off…and Jerry Nadler isn’t the guy that’s smart enough to figure out how to get out of the jam he’s in!

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

Lewandowski 1, House Judiciary 0

Former Trump campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski headed to Capitol Hill yesterday to testify before the House Judiciary Committee. See, they’re still hell bent on figuring out an angle to impeach Donald Trump, Brett Kavanaugh, and anyone else that happens to have an (R) after their name. And, as you might imagine, Lewandowski came out with his head held high, and slayed the mean old Jerry Nadler and company.

In fact, it was such an incredible win for Lewandowski that he now is toying with the idea of running for the US Senate from New Hampshire next year. That would put him up against Democrat Jeanne Shaheen, current Senator and former Governor of the Granite State.

Lewandowski went toe to toe with Sheila Jackson Lee, and Jerry Nadler among others, and didn’t flinch, didn’t give an inch, and fought back with an incredible display of independence and confidence. After watching this guy give his testimony I would be happy as a clam to have him as my Senator!

The Democrats find themselves in a terrible position just 14 months away from a major election, and it doesn’t seem as if they have any clue on how to get out of it. Nadler, who himself is going to be primaried in New York by one of AOC’s minions because he’s too “soft” and moderate, has been talking tough to try and show his base that he actually has a spine. That may be good news for him in his election, but it’s showing the rest of the country just what idiots the Democrats are.

It seems as though the Democrats can’t take “no” for an answer. No Russian Collusion, No Brett Kavanaugh sexual misconduct, No insane president. There’s just nothing there. So, with their backs up against the wall, the House continues to push on impeachment even though upwards of 70% of Americans, and now more than half of the Democrats out there don’t want it. That’s what is extremely vexing. If you think about it, IF Jerry Nadler were to get his way, and IF he were to get the House to actually impeach Donald Trump, there probably wouldn’t be an impeachment trial until after the election. That plays right into Trump’s hands.

And what happens IF the Senate (controlled by Republicans) are given yet another campaign issue of “Hey, elect the Republican so Trump doesn’t get convicted!”, and ends up expanding their lead over the Dems in the Senate? It could be years before the Democrats get over this faux pas. In fact, that’s precisely why Nancy Pelosi refuses to talk about impeachment any more. While Lee, Green, Waters, and Cummings are all screaming for impeachment, they are doing their party a huge disservice. There is no way in the world they can deliver on their promise of getting Trump removed from the White House. And, like what happened with Bill Clinton, Trump will wear it as a badge of courage as he glides to victory next November…taking the Senate and possibly the House along with him.

And then, what would Jerry Nadler, and Maxine Waters, and Sheila Jackson Lee, and Al Green, and Elijah Cummings (and though you haven’t heard from him lately, there’s of course Adam Schiff) do with themselves, assuming of course that they could all win reelection? They’d certainly have extra time on their hands because they’d thrown away the chance to be the majority power!

And all the while, Corey Lewandowski would be in the Senate, smiling….it’d be a beautiful thing!

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!


I can understand that the House of Representatives needs to do something…ANYTHING besides impeachment hearings on Donald Trump. They realize, I’m sure that the American public doesn’t believe they have anything on Trump and if they were to move forward with impeachment, it would be a travesty and they’d end up losing the House altogether. But why turn your attention to reparations?

That’s what the Jerry Nadler-led, House Judiciary Committee did last week. They decided that they’d bring out actors, rich black folks, and others with their hand out, and demand that it was now time to pay blacks for the slavery issue. I have several problems with that.

First of all, let me say unequivocally that the way blacks were treated in this country in our early years was inexcusable. Slavery of other humans beings is never, EVER an issue that even should be thought of. I don’t care the color of your skin, your age, your gender, your sexual orientation and the like, it’s wrong. Period. You don’t treat people like that.

That being said, wasn’t the fact 620,000 Americans died fighting each other over this and other issues enough reparations? Isn’t the fact America eventually righted the wrong and paid with its’ own blood enough?

And the bigger question is how in the world do today’s African Americans have any “suffering” because of what their ancestors went through some 155 years ago? Show me how YOU suffered because of what your great-great-great-great-great grandfather had to endure, and maybe we’ll talk. And IF we were to pay reparations for slavery, does that take the whole black question off the table forever? Does that put an end to affirmative action (yeah…it still does exist, though not officially)? Does that put an end to racism? Does it solve all of our nation’s problems regarding race?

We haven’t even scratched the surface of who we are going to pay and who isn’t qualified. Are you qualified if you’re just black, and how black? If I have a relative that was a slave, but married a white woman, and he’s the only relative I’ve ever had that was black, and I’m white as the driven snow, does that make me eligible? And do I have to prove it? Or and I just stick my hand out and say, “Yup…I’m deserving of a handout!” Where are you going to draw the line? If I emigrated to this country from say…Brazil. I’m black, and I got here in 1983. Does that make me eligible? Are you going to even check? Or, as I would suspect, anyone that answers on the 2020 Census that they are African American would get a check in the mail someday?

There are way too many questions, and not enough clear answers to decide this question, and I’m not sure America will ever be doing “paying” for slavery. But I can tell you this…reparations of any kind, for any wrong doing of a group of people are wrong. You can’t correct racism with money. It begins with a change of the heart, and all the legislation, all of the hearings on Capitol Hill aren’t going to change that!

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

Is The Impeachment Train Really That Far Off The Rails?

I had to laugh when I saw who Jerry Nadler (D-NY) was going to call as his first witness in the House Judiciary hearings into the Robert Mueller Report. It harkens back to the day of price controls, fifty-cent a gallon gasoline, and the Oakland A’s winning their next to the last World Series they’ve ever won. It was 1974. And back then, Richard Nixon became the first president in United States history to resign the office.

Make no mistake, had Nixon not resigned, he would have faced impeachment in the House of Representatives, and almost certain conviction in the US Senate for the Watergate cover up. And one of the guys that helped bring about his downfall was White House Counsel, John Dean. So, why bring up all of this ancient history now?

Well, Jerry Nadler has decided to bring John Dean in as his first witness. You may be asking yourself what a guy that approved hush money for a two-bit burglary some 47 years ago has to do with Donald Trump and the Mueller Report?

The answer is absolutely nothing.

So, why bring Dean in to testify? What’s he testifying to? What can John Dean possibly bring to the picture of the Mueller Report? I mean, what questions can honestly be asked of this guy that has the slightest thing to do with the current situation? Hell, half of America wasn’t even born with Dean plead guilty in 1973. What in the world is going through Jerry Nadler’s mind that he’s going to use some 80 year old convicted criminal, with no ties to Washington DC or Donald Trump since the early 1970’s?

Well, that just goes to show you how far off the rails these guys are when it comes to trying to find something…ANYTHING that they can tie Trump to some sort of collusion with Russia, or obstruction of justice…or…or….maybe he approved the payment of hush money, like Dean did? Whatever it is, this move by Jerry Nadler shows the absolute desperation of the Democrats who are so keyed up to impeach Donald Trump on any charge up to and including parking fines, that they are willing to bring an 80 year old who hasn’t been heard from in almost half a century to DC. And what, pray tell, is John Dean going to be able to tell them? That he’s sorry for his role in Watergate? That he really didn’t mean to approve the hush money? That he’s learned his lesson, and served his time, and became an investment banker, and a celebrated author with several books?

No…John Dean showing up to testify at the House Judiciary Committee is a kin to a cornerman in boxing throwing in the towel. There’s nothing there. And so, we have to do something…so we may as well bring back someone that most of America has never heard from…and ask him leading questions to see if he can say anything that we can use against Trump.

Which just proves beyond any shadow of doubt, there are no charges, there is nothing to impeach Trump on…and Democrats, once again, are more interesting in playing Columbo and doing investigations than they are about doing their jobs.

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!

Nadler’s Probe Falls Short

Jerry Nadler has told the world at a recent press conference that he is very happy with the results of his “request” to 81 persons, entities, and governmental departments to share with his House Judiciary Committee documents that would help them investigate what Nadler calls “alleged obstruction of justice, public corruption, and other abuses of power by President Trump”.

Now, if you would have stopped paying attention at that press conference, you would have thought Donald Trump was in a world of hurt. Actually, what Nadler said needed to be fact-checked, because a lot of what he claimed was just plain wrong.

He said that “a lot” of the 81 requests had been answered. Actually, he has a much different view of what “a lot” is than I do. Out of 81 requests that were issued, only 8 responded. He said at the presser that he already had documents that numbered in the “tens of thousands”. Ooops. Wrong again. Let’s seek the truth on this, shall we?

First of all, the eight people that responded were, former Trump campaign adviser, George Papadopoulos; former Trump national security adviser, JD Gordan; The National Rifle Association; Russian lobbyist Rinat Akhmetshin; Trump political adviser, Sam Nunberg; former White House chief strategist, Steve Bannon; Trump inaugural committee chair, Tom Barrack; and the 58th Presidential Inauguration Committee.

The “tens of thousands of documents” that Nadler claims to have either already received or be promised is far short of that number. The actual number is 8,157 pages, and not the “tens of thousands of documents” he claims.

However, what’s interesting is that some of the people, and organizations that were said to have cooperated with Nadler, may not be as forthcoming as what he wishes or told the world. And House Oversight Committee Chairman, Elijah Cummings, told the Washington Post that he was having a hard time getting anyone to respond to his requests for information in HIS investigation. Apparently, those folks already feel they’ve given enough information to Congress and don’t want to take part. And as the Republicans saw during the Obama administration, when it comes to getting cooperation out of uncooperative witnesses, it’s a very difficult situation trying to get information out of someone that doesn’t want to give it. Do the names Eric Holder, or Lois Lerner give you a clue?

No, the Democrats can spin their wheels and run as many investigations into Donald Trump as they want. In the end though, there isn’t anything that they are going to find that is going to lead to anything but more blather. Obviously the left didn’t learn the lesson they made the GOP learn during the last administration!

Carry on world…you’re dismissed!