Senate Impeachment Hearings

[Shabibilicious]

Politics

Lindsey Graham Pushes Back on Trump’s Criticism of John Bolton

Zachary Evans

January 29, 2020, 11:49 AM EST

 

 

Senator Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) released a statement on Wednesday pushing back on President Trump’s criticism of former White House national security adviser John Bolton.

“I am concerned when John Bolton’s credibility is attacked, it makes it more likely some will feel the need to call him as a witness,” Graham said. “In that event, it would be important for the President and his team to call witnesses on other issues.”

Graham seemed to be responding to Trump’s earlier criticism of Bolton on Wednesday.

“If I listened to [Bolton], we would be in World War Six by now, and goes out and IMMEDIATELY writes a nasty & untrue book,” Trump wrote on Twitter. “All Classified National Security. Who would do this?”

In his statement, Graham asserted that no witnesses would be necessary in the impeachment trial.

“It is my opinion, based on the law and facts, that additional testimony is unnecessary in this case,” Graham wrote. “For the sake of argument, one could assume everything attributable to John Bolton is accurate and still the House case would fall well below the standards to remove a President from office.”

The Senate will vote on Friday on whether to subpoena witnesses and documents as evidence for the trial. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.) told caucus members on Tuesday that they lack the votes to prevent the calling of witnesses.

On Sunday the New York Times reported that Bolton had written in the manuscript of his upcoming book, “The Room Where It Happened: A White House Memoir,” that President Trump had conditioned aid to Ukraine on that country’s commitment to investigate Joe and Hunter Biden. Bolton denied leaking the report, saying there was “no coordination” between himself, his publisher and the Times.

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/lindsey-graham-pushes-back-trump-164949565.html

 

GO RV, then BV

[Shabibilicious]

Politics

White House on "DEFCON 2" after McConnell fails to block witness testimony

CBS News VideosJanuary 29, 2020, 7:27 AM EST

 

A senior administration official deeply involved in the White House impeachment strategy has told CBS News that they are on “DEFCON 2” after Trump’s lawyers wrapped his defense on Tuesday. Mitch McConnell told colleagues that he does not have the votes to block witness testimony as pressure on John Bolton to testify skyrockets. Nancy Cordes is on Capitol Hill with the next steps in Trump’s historic trial.

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/white-house-defcon-2-mcconnell-122502980.html

 

GO RV, then BV

[coorslite21]

30 minutes ago, Shabibilicious said:

Politics

White House on "DEFCON 2" after McConnell fails to block witness testimony

CBS News VideosJanuary 29, 2020, 7:27 AM EST

 

A senior administration official deeply involved in the White House impeachment strategy has told CBS News that they are on “DEFCON 2” after Trump’s lawyers wrapped his defense on Tuesday. Mitch McConnell told colleagues that he does not have the votes to block witness testimony as pressure on John Bolton to testify skyrockets. Nancy Cordes is on Capitol Hill with the next steps in Trump’s historic trial.

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/white-house-defcon-2-mcconnell-122502980.html

 

GO RV, then BV

 

Considering there are 2 more days of question and answers left....anyone saying they know the outcome would be looking for some trouble from Roberts......jurors don't say they know the end results 2 thirds of the way thru a trial.....

 

And another unnamed source.....must have been Vindmans twin brother.......

CL

[Shabibilicious]

21 minutes ago, coorslite21 said:

 

Considering there are 2 more days of question and answers left....anyone saying they know the outcome would be looking for some trouble from Roberts......jurors don't say they know the end results 2 thirds of the way thru a trial.....

 

McConnell, the self-professed non-impartial juror did.....3 weeks before the trial.    

 

GO RV, then BV

[Karsten]

John Bolton: "If I had to say something I knew was false to protect American national security..."

 

 

Karsten

[Synopsis]

1 minute ago, Karsten said:

John Bolton: "If I had to say something I knew was false to protect American national security..."

 

So John Bolton believes Rule Of Law is a National Security Threat so he lies about his relationship to The True The United States Of America Patriot President Donald J Trump AND what The True The United States Of America Patriot President Donald J Trump ACTUALLY SAID AND DID???!!!

 

      

 

           

 

Each AND Every ONE of the "Impeach The True The United States Of America Patriot President Donald J Trump AT ALL COSTS" MUST subsequently come to trial with THEIR ACTUAL violations of Rule Of Law THEN IMMEDIATELY HANGED FOR TREASON!!!

 

Rule Of Law Based On The Constitution Of The United States Of America TO INCLUDE The Ratified Bill Of Rights IN POSTERITY AND PERPETUITY DEPENDS ON IT!!!

 

Liars each AND every one of THEM ("impeachment" TRAITORS)!!!

[bostonangler]

6 hours ago, coorslite21 said:

Things that make no sense interest me.....so I ask why?

 

I understand.... Why doesn't Trump allow his people to testify? Why doesn't the White House release the transcript (unedited)? Why doesn't Trump want to end this?

 

B/A

[Karsten]

It becomes clear why they’re all trying to destroy Trump

https://realityanddenial.wordpress.com/2019/10/07/it-becomes-clear-why-theyre-all-trying-to-destroy-trump/?sfns=mo&fbclid=IwAR3cNMbubIkJH6zr8oBkOubOCGpYxXwsgC3af-ASQY3A66GK4H8BCz48rds

 

Karsten

[boosterbglee]

I hope this all comes to light in the near future...the swamp continues to be deep!  

[Karsten]

Backer on Dems: Those Who Scream Loudest on Corruption Are Often the Most Corrupt

https://www.westernjournal.com/backer-dems-scream-loudest-corruption-often-corrupt/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=westernjournalism&utm_content=2020-01-28&utm_campaign=manualpost&fbclid=IwAR048HVxlIepdjToBUGZ4c3G8zozgjZ9XohZaOTxkQof788DFvNeIYNHbTA

 

Karsten

 

[coorslite21]

So I read that 75% of the public wants witnesses......I call BS.....

 

How about 100% of the public wants this to end.......yay....

 

News has been all about Romney and others who might demand additional witnesses....I call BS

 

I mentioned in an earlier post that a few on the left would vote against additional witnesses....

 

Watch and see.....Manchin of WV......Sinema of AZ......Jones of Alabama..........Gardner of Colorado......

 

Time will tell.....anyone care to comment......?      CL

[nstoolman1]

This reminds me of one of the most important thing an attorney thinks of a witness.

 

Never ask a question you don't know the answer too. 

 

I say call the witness and let the Democrats stew in their juices.

When Schiff, Pelosi, whistleblower, Nadler, Holder, Lynch, Clinton, Obama and the whole upper FBI/ DoJ  

are caught lying to Congress, Barr and Durham can slap the cuffs on them and send them to GitMo.

There is enough evidence through FOIA that proves them guilty and Schiffs comments are on record. 

[Shabibilicious]

New Yahoo News/YouGov poll shows voters believe Bolton over Trump — and they want Bolton to testify

Andrew Romano

West Coast Correspondent

,

Yahoo News•January 29, 2020

 

 

Scroll back up to restore default view.

According to a new Yahoo News/YouGov poll, bombshell revelations from an upcoming book by former national security adviser John Bolton — which reportedly includes an account of President Trump insisting that military aid to Ukraine be withheld until officials there announced investigations into his political rivals — have moved public opinion further in favor of calling Bolton to testify in Trump’s ongoing impeachment trial.   

Bolton’s claim is the first time a senior administration official has provided first-person evidence of an explicit quid pro quo in the president’s dealings with Ukraine, an issue at the heart of the Senate proceedings.

Trump has denied the allegation, tweeting that he “NEVER told John Bolton that the aid to Ukraine was tied to investigations into Democrats.” Yet when the Yahoo News/YouGov poll asked registered voters who they believed, 45 percent said Bolton and only 39 percent said Trump.  

The poll found that a clear majority of registered voters (55 percent) now want to hear Bolton’s testimony, up 2 percentage points from the previous Yahoo News/YouGov poll, which was conducted before the Bolton news broke. Only 29 percent of registered voters say they don’t want to hear from Bolton.

John Bolton and Donald Trump. (Photo illustration: Yahoo News; photos: AP(2), Getty Images)

Seeking to gauge how views on impeachment have shifted over the last week, the new poll surveyed the same voters as the earlier poll and was conducted Jan. 28 and 29.

Among the more than 1,200 respondents surveyed both before and after the Bolton revelations, 23 percent of those who initially said the Senate should not call new witnesses have changed their mind since last week, with 11 percent now saying the Senate should call new witnesses and 12 percent now saying they’re not sure. A smaller percentage (16 percent) have moved in the opposite direction on witnesses, from “yes” to “no” or “not sure.”

Over the last week there was even more movement on the question of whether Bolton himself should testify, with a combined 35 percent of those who previously said “no” moving to “yes” (20 percent) or “not sure” (15 percent). Meanwhile, only 17 percent of those who previously said “yes” moved to “no (11 percent) or “not sure” (6 percent).

Yet the poll also found that the Bolton revelations have polarized views on impeachment witnesses. Last week, 43 percent of Republicans said the Senate should not call new witnesses; 35 percent said new witnesses should be called. In the wake of the Bolton news, 56 percent of Republicans now say the Senate should not call witnesses while only 20 percent say new witness should be called. That’s a nearly 30-point net shift among Republicans against new witnesses in a single week.

Both Democrats and independents continue to favor new witnesses, with 86 percent of Democrats saying they should be called and 53 percent of independents saying the same.

Among Republicans, the shift against calling Bolton himself has been nearly as pronounced. When asked last week whether they wanted to hear Bolton testify, 33 percent of Republicans said yes; 39 percent said no. This week, however, 53 percent of Republicans said they did not want to hear from Bolton, while only 25 percent said they did want to hear from him — a net shift of more than 20 percentage points. At the same time, the percentage of Democrats saying they want to hear from Bolton increased 10 points from last week to this week.

Such polarization has actually depressed overall interest in new witnesses, with the percentage of registered voters who say they want to hear from other figures falling slightly from last week. Even so, majorities of registered voters still want to hear testimony from Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani (56 percent) and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo (56 percent). Interest in hearing from Joe Biden and his son Hunter, on the other hand, has fallen below 50 percent among registered voters since last week.

What hasn’t changed is the public’s overarching opinion about Trump’s alleged misconduct. A majority of registered voters (52 percent yes vs. 43 percent no) continue to say that he abused his power as president; at the same time, registered voters remain evenly divided (44 percent yes vs. 46 percent no) over the question of whether the president should be removed from office.

That said, the Senate’s upcoming vote Friday on whether to allow new witnesses — a development Republicans now believe they have the votes to block — could trigger real political consequences for senators facing reelection in November. Asked whether their senator’s decision to vote against calling new witnesses will make them more or less likely to vote for that senator on Election Day, 45 percent of registered voters in states with 2020 Senate elections said “less likely.” Only 21 percent said the opposite.  

 

https://news.yahoo.com/new-yahoo-news-you-gov-poll-shows-voters-believe-bolton-over-trump-and-they-want-bolton-to-testify-005323332.html

 

GO RV, then BV

[Shabibilicious]

Justice Roberts Blocks Rand Paul from Naming Whistleblower During Impeachment Trial

Zachary Evans

,

National Review•January 30, 2020

 

 

Supreme Court Justice John Roberts on Wednesday signaled to Republican senators that he will not say the name of the alleged Ukraine whistleblower during the question and answer session of the Senate impeachment trial.

Roberts refused to read aloud a question submitted by Senator Rand Paul (R., Ky.) that contained the whistleblower’s name. The justice is tasked with reading questions submitted by senators, and up to now has not been compelled to reveal the identity of the alleged whistleblower.

“We’ve got members who, as you have already determined I think, have an interest in questions related to the whistleblower,” Senate Majority Whip John Thune (R., S.D.) told Politico. “But I suspect that won’t happen. I don’t think that happens. And I guess I would hope it doesn’t.”

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.) has also reportedly cautioned against naming the whistleblower during impeachment proceedings. Paul, however, has said the name in several media reports over the course of the impeachment process.

“I don’t want to have to stand up to try and fight for recognition,” Paul reportedly said after his question was rejected.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D., Calif.) publicly revealed the existence of the whistleblower complaint in September, and the complaint eventually led to the impeachment of President Trump. Republicans have accused Schiff of improperly coordinating his actions with the whistleblower.

 

https://news.yahoo.com/justice-roberts-blocks-rand-paul-130556096.html

 

GO RV, then BV

[coorslite21]

58 minutes ago, Shabibilicious said:

Justice Roberts Blocks Rand Paul from Naming Whistleblower During Impeachment Trial

Zachary Evans

,

National Review•January 30, 2020

 

 

Supreme Court Justice John Roberts on Wednesday signaled to Republican senators that he will not say the name of the alleged Ukraine whistleblower during the question and answer session of the Senate impeachment trial.

Roberts refused to read aloud a question submitted by Senator Rand Paul (R., Ky.) that contained the whistleblower’s name. The justice is tasked with reading questions submitted by senators, and up to now has not been compelled to reveal the identity of the alleged whistleblower.

“We’ve got members who, as you have already determined I think, have an interest in questions related to the whistleblower,” Senate Majority Whip John Thune (R., S.D.) told Politico. “But I suspect that won’t happen. I don’t think that happens. And I guess I would hope it doesn’t.”

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.) has also reportedly cautioned against naming the whistleblower during impeachment proceedings. Paul, however, has said the name in several media reports over the course of the impeachment process.

“I don’t want to have to stand up to try and fight for recognition,” Paul reportedly said after his question was rejected.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D., Calif.) publicly revealed the existence of the whistleblower complaint in September, and the complaint eventually led to the impeachment of President Trump. Republicans have accused Schiff of improperly coordinating his actions with the whistleblower.

 

https://news.yahoo.com/justice-roberts-blocks-rand-paul-130556096.html

 

GO RV, then BV

 

Pretty funny......the guy who no one knows.......the whistleblower......the guy who started this whole charade.....yet they all claim he is a ghost who needs to be protected....

 

It is well documented Schiff and his office interacted with him......yet Schiff.....on the Senate floor.......answering a question from a Senator.....read by Supreme  Court Justice Roberts......said he didn't know who it was......wouldn't that be a crime.......

 

Anyhow.......sham is about over......55-45 .......no more witnesses.......acquittal follows.....game over!

 

https://thefederalist.com/2019/11/10/schiffs-committee-published-name-of-alleged-whistleblower-last-week/

 

CL

Edited January 30, 2020 by coorslite21

[Shabibilicious]

3 minutes ago, coorslite21 said:

 

Pretty funny......the guy who no one knows.......the whistleblower......the guy who started this whole charade.....yet they all claim he is a ghost who needs to be protected....

 

It is well documented Schiff and his office interacted with him......yet Schiff.....on the Senate floor.......answering a question from a Senator.....read by Supreme  Court Justice Roberts......said he didn't know who it was......wouldn't that be a crime.......

 

Anyhow.......sham is about over......55-45 .......no more witnesses.......acquittal follows.....game over!

CL

 

You're probably right....yet "impeachment" will always be attached to DJT with good reason.....and the GOP will forever be known for eroding the checks and balances safe guards of the U.S. Constitution.....It may not be the next election or even the one after that....but the time will come when Democrats will be back in charge....And when that happens, will they do their due diligence and defend the constitution or go on the offense as payback?....human nature says payback....and the GOP will have only themselves to blame, even though they'll do their best to spin it.  As always, just my opinion.

 

GO RV, then BV

[coorslite21]

1 minute ago, Shabibilicious said:

 

You're probably right....yet "impeachment" will always be attached to DJT with good reason.....and the GOP will forever be known for eroding the checks and balances safe guards of the U.S. Constitution.....It may not be the next election or even the one after that....but the time will come when Democrats will be back in charge....And when that happens, will they do their due diligence and defend the constitution or go on the offense as payback?....human nature says payback....and the GOP will have only themselves to blame, even though they'll do their best to spin it.  As always, just my opinion.

 

GO RV, then BV

 

In partial agreement again.....Pelosi and the left will always be remembered for the only purely partisan Presidential impeachment in history....

 

In a perfect world they might all see the flaws in the process and in a bipartisan effort work to fix it so neither side.......and all of us........never has to experience another circus like the past 2.....

JMO.       CL

[Shabibilicious]

7 minutes ago, coorslite21 said:

 

In partial agreement again.....Pelosi and the left will always be remembered for the only purely partisan Presidential impeachment in history....

 

In a perfect world they might all see the flaws in the process and in a bipartisan effort work to fix it so neither side.......and all of us........never has to experience another circus like the past 2.....

JMO.       CL

 

We're one acquittal away from becoming a full fledged autocracy.....Dershowitz has advocated for a U.S. President to have 'absolute power'....the framers are rolling in their graves.  The next step for Trump is to ban future presidential elections and declare himself supreme leader....and the GOP controlled senate is giving him permission to do it.  Pathetic.  Not dramatic....just my HONEST opinion.

 

GO RV, then BV

Edited January 30, 2020 by Shabibilicious

[coorslite21]

2 minutes ago, Shabibilicious said:

 

We're one acquittal away from becoming a full fledged autocracy.....Dershowitz has advocated for a U.S. President to have 'absolute power'....the framers are rolling in their graves.  The next step for Trump is to ban future presidential elections and declare himself supreme leader....and the GOP controlled senate is giving him permission to do it.  Pathetic.  Not dramatic....just my HONEST opinion.

 

GO RV, then BV

 

On this one I'll have to disagree.......this will pass....

 

No one is making Trump a "King"

 

There will be an election......someone will win...bubbles will burst.....cycles will cycle.....blame for the down turn will be spread around.....

 

And the beat will go on....

 

JMO.     CL

[Shabibilicious]

3 minutes ago, coorslite21 said:

 

On this one I'll have to disagree.......this will pass....

 

No one is making Trump a "King"

 

There will be an election......someone will win...bubbles will burst.....cycles will cycle.....blame for the down turn will be spread around.....

 

And the beat will go on....

 

JMO.     CL

 

One can only hope that's the case.....I believe you're underestimating Trump's need for control and loyalty, his narcissism and his rabid base.  As always, just my opinion

 

GO RV, then BV

[Shabibilicious]

Yahoo News

Dershowitz: Trump can't be impeached because he believed his reelection is in the national interest

Dylan StablefordSenior Writer

January 29, 2020, 4:27 PM EST

 

 

Schiff responds to Trump Lawyer Dershowitz's 'very odd argument'

Yahoo News Video

Scroll back up to restore default view.

Retired Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz argued in President Trump’s impeachment trial Wednesday that the president’s demand for Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden — a leading candidate to oppose him in the presidential campaign — is not an impeachable offense because Trump was acting on the belief that his reelection is “in the public interest.”

“If a president does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in an impeachment,” Dershowitz said in response to Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, on the first of two days during which the opposing legal teams answer written questions from the senators. 

Cruz had asked, “As a matter of law, does it matter if there was a quid pro quo?”

Trump has repeatedly denied the existence of a quid pro quo in his dealings with Ukraine, but that defense suffered a blow with the disclosure that his former national security adviser John Bolton has firsthand evidence that the president intended precisely that. Accordingly, his lawyers have shifted to the argument that even if there was one, it does not rise to the level of an impeachable offense.

But Dershowitz’s argument seemed to go well beyond that, asserting that a president is entitled to take action that will advance his reelection chances on the basis of his own belief that it’s for the good of the country — as Abraham Lincoln did in 1864, ordering that troops from Indiana be given leave to return home to vote in an election to keep the state government in Republican hands.

Dershowitz offered the hypothetical scenario of a Democratic president offering a quid pro quo to help solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — a long-standing goal of American foreign policy that if successful would also boost his or her reelection prospects.

The president’s lawyer and frequent defender on Fox News — who nevertheless says he didn’t vote for him and opposes many of his policies — did not address the fact that in (allegedly) withholding military aid to Ukraine in exchange for electoral help, Trump was in fact acting against official U.S. policy, which was to aid that country in its war with Russia. 

“We may argue it’s not in the national interest for a particular president to be reelected,” Dershowitz told the Senate, “but for it to be impeachable you would have to discern that he or she made a decision solely on the basis of, as the house managers put it, corrupt motives.”

He added: “It is so dangerous to try to psychoanalyze a president to try to get into the intricacies of the human mind. Everybody has mixed motives.”  

“[Dershowitz] just argued that a president who believes only he can fix it — who thinks his re-election is vital to the nation — can’t be impeached for abusing his power to corrupt the next election in his favor because by definition he’s doing what he thinks best for the country!!” tweeted Laurence Tribe, a Harvard law professor and a constitutional scholar who is frequently at odds with Dershowitz.

“Accepting this argument would put us on a short path toward dictatorship, benevolent or otherwise. It’s incompatible with government of, by, and for the people,” Tribe added. “It’s government by egomania.”

Taking the argument to a reductio ad absurdum, the Atlantic magazine’s Adam Serwer wrote on Twitter: “If the president drops nuclear bombs on New York and California to neutralize their electoral votes because he believes it is in the national interest, it is not impeachable, according to Alan Dershowitz.”

“The president lawyers are arguing that if the president ordered his election opponent arrested that would be fine because he’s pursuing the national interest in order to get re-elected,” MSNBC’s Chris Hayes tweeted. “Just to be clear this is the unavoidable logical extension of Dershowitz’s argument.”

In response to a follow-up question from Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, Adam Schiff, the lead impeachment manager for House Democrats, countered with a hypothetical of his own: What if, in 2011, President Barack Obama had asked Russia to launch an investigation into Mitt Romney, his Republican opponent in the 2012 election, in exchange for U.S. military aid?

“Do any of us have any question that Barack Obama would be impeached for that kind of misconduct?” Schiff asked. “Are we really ready to say that would be OK?”

“All quid pros are not the same,” Schiff added. “Some are legitimate and some are corrupt. You don’t have to be a mind reader to figure out which are which. For one thing, you can ask John Bolton.”

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/dershowitz-trump-quid-pro-quo-not-impeachable-national-interest-212733088.html

 

Dershowitz's argument should scare the hell out of every American.

 

GO RV, then BV

[Indraman]

17 minutes ago, Shabibilicious said:

 

We're one acquittal away from becoming a full fledged autocracy.....Dershowitz has advocated for a U.S. President to have 'absolute power'....the framers are rolling in their graves.  The next step for Trump is to ban future presidential elections and declare himself supreme leader....and the GOP controlled senate is giving him permission to do it.  Pathetic.  Not dramatic....just my HONEST opinion.

 

GO RV, then BV

 

I have to say @Shabibilicious, you are doing the same thing that LEFTIST and many Democrats do in this country to those who may hold a contrary position or point of view: ascribe a motive or belief to them that is FALSE and distorted from any basis in reality...SHAME ON YOU!!! At no time has Dershowitz ever claimed or advocated for the POTUS to have 'Absolute Power'. This claim is FALSE and a shameful example of how you and the LEFTIST attack those with opposing views.

 

 

Indy

[Shabibilicious]

Just now, Indraman said:

 

I have to say @Shabibilicious, you are doing the same thing that LEFTIST and many Democrats do in this country to those who may hold a contrary position or point of view: ascribe a motive or belief to them that is FALSE and distorted from any basis in reality...SHAME ON YOU!!! At no time has Dershowitz ever claimed or advocated for the POTUS to have 'Absolute Power'. This claim is FALSE and a shameful example of how you and the LEFTIST attack those with opposing views.

 

 

Indy

 

I respectfully disagree (in lower case)    If the shoe was on the other foot and this was Barack Obama.....you people would lose your minds.  FACT.

 

GO RV, then BV

[Karsten]

VIDEO: John Bolton Praised Trump’s Ukraine Call Before Getting Fired

 

https://www.analyzingamerica.org/video-john-bolton-praised-trumps-ukraine-call-before-getting-fired/?utm_source=msp

 

Karsten

[learning all i can]

Where to start?  As a retiree I have had the privilege to watch this unfolding from the very start.  I watched and heard every witness when the Dems declared impeachment proceedings in the bunker and have not missed one iota since it has been marched over to the Senate.  I have stayed away from news articles, even turning away from fox news when Hannity, Ingram, Levin and Rush have brought in their opinions.  I have held on purely to every word brought forth from both sides which I believe has enabled me to see the hypocrisy and the true dealings of the democratic party.  They would truely destroy our constitution  in exchange for their own power.  I have never witnessed such hate for another human being nor the power-hungar that could actually be the first act to destroy our nation..  I have seen the twisted lies from the Dems as from my own remembrance of their so called witnesses.  The old saying "say it enough then most will believe it and it becomes true" has been consistent in their lowdown tactics which has been soely sought thru-out these whole proceedings.  Surely they will be held accountable for such underhanded dealings.  I can only pray that it is the Lords will to open every eye of the American people to see the corruption and hold these men and women accountable for the attempt to bring destruction and the downfall of our country.

 

Now that I have given my opinion, I have a thought about something that has come up about Bolton and his book.  How in the world will calling Bolton help them.  If his book is under review with the NSC and cannot be released until further investigation then he certainly can't be called as a witness and detail what's in his book.  How will this help the dems?  The Dems have one thing on their mind and that is taking control of the 2020 election.  They have proven themselves to be the most corrupt and underhanded group of lawlessness that I have ever witnessed.  We all should be outraged.  We should have the wisdom and foresight to understand that we just can't go on like this and expect our children and grandchildren to have a future of law.  Yes, each of us can give our own opinions and fuss about it all day long but in the end there will only be one winner and that winner will be the one that holds true to the standards that God has set before us.  We all know His truths, are we letting our hearts be swayed by our own desires and wants just so we can put up a deceitful arguement as the Dems have done for the power or so we can say "yep, I won that one?"  This whole thing has been disgusting but has enabled most of us to embrace and stand firm for actual truth.  It has enabled us to see the real depravity and what man will actually do for power and control.  Maybe, this is why it was designed to help each of us see the true evils of the world we live in......I know that I am saddened and have more concerns about the future generations than ever.  Man continues to contribute to evil and brings about its growth.  I fear it is nearly full blown if God doesn't intervene and put His hand back on our Nation.  

 

I've  rambled enough.  I know much of what I've expressed here means very little to many of you and that's ok with me.  I pray for our Country everyday.  I pray for the future of our children everyday.  We just can't let these unlawful things continue if we value the lives of our loved ones.  Gods word will stand whether we use it or not.  I just know in my heart that it's time that we look at tomorrow instead of putting all our focus on today and who will win today and who was right and who was wrong.  It is clear that we need help and that help will not come from government.