When Hillary Clinton lost the nomination to Il Duce Obama in 2008, some thought her prospects of becoming president were done.  Of course, they weren’t.  She became Secretary of State, and from that position, the rest is history.  She set up her private server in the bathroom of some house, which permitted numerous foreign agents to hack her unsecure emails, which we now know included some 600 classified messages.  Her office also permitted Hillary to run her Family business on the side, extorting “contributions” to the Clinton Foundation from foreigners who stood to make lots of money from favorable decisions of the State Department.  As in the current Joe/Hunter Biden dispute, as any Democrat will tell you, “that’s unsubstantiated!”  Well, here’s how it works folks.  When you keep your eyes closed, ignore the evidence and never investigate, nothing is substantiated.  And that’s the way the Democrats like it.  After Hillary lost to Trump, most of us reasonably expected that she would go away.  She had her chance at the brass ring and her political career was over.  Or so we thought.  She raked in a few more millions of dollars from books, and has constantly appeared in public to make excuses about why she lost the election, and to bash Donald Trump.  Since 2016, Hillary has offered a seemingly never-ending list of excuses for her own failure:  Russian interference through either a disinformation campaign via WikiLeaks or Trump-Russia collusion; she’s blamed Russian President Vladimir Putin; former FBI Director James Comey’s criminal investigation of her use of a private email server while Secretary of State; poor voter data from the Democratic National Committee; voter suppression and voter ID laws;
sexism; racism (because she’s whiter than white?); Barack Obama; Bernie Sanders and his supporters; Jill Stein; the mainstream media (which bent over backwards to prop her up the whole time), specifically the New York Times for aggressively covering her email scandal; the Electoral College;
bad polling; all the people who assumed she would win; “gullible Americans” (that’s us folks) and “fake news.”  Hillary jumped right aboard the Russian collusion train, because it was her, Il Duce Obama, and her minions, both inside and outside the government who bought the phony dossier (from Russians) and launched the coup attempt still ongoing against Donald Trump.  “What Putin wanted to do was … influence our election, and he’s not exactly fond of strong women, so you add that together and that’s pretty much what it means.”  She’s accused her co-conspirator Il Duce Obama too, “It’s really difficult to succeed a president of your own party who has served two terms. That is a historical fact.”  So, Obama’s success caused Hillary’s failure?  Bernie Sanders was to blame too, “His attacks caused lasting damage, making it harder to unify progressives in the general election and paving the way for Trump’s ‘Crooked Hillary’ campaign.”  No, the fact that you’re a criminal paved the way for the Crooked Hillary campaign.  Low information voters also were blamed.  Just not smart enough to vote for Hillary, I guess.  Also, all the women who weren’t as strong as Hillary, and who voted the way their husbands ordered them to vote.  She still wasn’t done though.  She made so many excuses that she actually forgot that she lost in 2016, telling an interviewer, “Obviously, I can beat him again.”  That sparked speculation that Hillary might try to get into the 2020 presidential field, or more to the point, might offer herself at the 11th hour to save her Party from the Star Wars bar scene group of reprobates, malcontents and assorted Left-wing nuts currently running for the Democratic nomination.  Now she’s doubling down on the “Russians stole the election” nonsense.  Hillary recently gave an interview in which she accused Democratic candidate Tulsi Gabbard of being “a Russian operative.”  Gabbard is a Congresswoman, the first Samoan-American elected to Congress, a war veteran, and a practicing Hindu, hence “a Russkie.”   What’s more, she’s not the only one.  Hillary also labelled independent candidate Jill Stein a Russian operative.  And of course, Donald Trump is a Russian asset too.  That goes without saying.  The thought of Hillary running again in 2020 has not gone over well with Democrats from either wing of the Party.  Democrat Senators Durbin, Manchin, Bloomenthal, Jones, and Heinrich are against a Hillary 3.0 campaign.  Even crazy Maisie Hirono wants no part of her, “We have a lot of really fantastic candidates out there already.  Let’s leave it at that.”  All I can say about the Hillary in 2020 talk is, “Hillary, please run again.”  2016 was so much fun.  Who wouldn’t want to watch Hillary and daughter Chelsea, who always appears beside her nowadays, back on the campaign trail.  Who wouldn’t want to be treated to more “Crooked Hillary” from the President, instead of “Sleepy Joe” or “Pocahontas?”  So I think Hillary should definitely run again.  But let’s not stop there.  John Kerry – come on down!  You should run again.  Where’s Al Gore these days?  He should make a comeback.   Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton could add more allegations of race discrimination to the equation, spicing up what has been a lackluster primary season.  Billionaire Michael Bloomberg just entered the race.  He’s got 10 times the money that Trump has, so he’s qualified.  Let’s have more billionaire Bolsheviks and millionaire Marxists on the stage.  The more the merrier, and the more Democrats who get into the act, the more the field will split the political contribution pot, and the more the Democrat Party will splinter and divide itself.  So run, Hill run!  And if you can’t run fast, Chelsea will be beside you to push your big ass up onto the podium.

The impeachment of a President is a serious thing.  An attempt to remove a President amounts to the “undoing of a national election.”  Attempts to impeach make people angry. “one of the reasons we all feel so angry about what they are doing is that … they are ripping asunder our votes.”  That must be true because those words were spoken by Jerry Nadler (in 1998).  He must have changed his mind.  When such a serious matter is contemplated, it must be undertaken only when there is bipartisan agreement as to its necessity.  “It would have been wrong for Richard Nixon to have been removed from office based upon a purely partisan vote.  No president should be removed from office merely because one party enjoys a commanding lead in either house of the Congress …”  What’s more, “It is our constitutional duty to give the president the benefit of the doubt on the facts …”  These are the words of Joe Biden (in 1998).  He’s either changed his mind, or lost his mind.  I can’t decide which.  Another vintage 1998 lawmaker cautioned against one Party acting purely out of hatred of a President from the other Party.  “until the Republicans free themselves of this hatred, our country will suffer.” That was the wisdom of Nancy Pelosi, who today is the ringmaster of the impeachment circus.  After all, it should be remembered that the President has pressing duties which must not be disturbed except for the most grievous wrongdoing.  “Today we are here in the people’s House debating the partisan impeachment of the President of the United States of America while the Commander in Chief is managing a crisis and asking world leaders for support.”  So sayeth Maxine Waters in 1998.  Today, asking a world leader for help by itself is reason for impeachment.  And even when impeachment is undertaken after a finding of a high crime, such as perjury, as in 1998, some lawmakers still find the process detestable.  John Conyers was moved to observe, “I am witnessing the most tragic event of my career in the Congress, in effect a … coup d’etat, in process.”  Well John, if the shoe fits …  The Dems went nuts when Donald Trump recently said his impeachment inquiry was a “lynching.”  But I guess it depends on who’s ox is being gored.  Joe Biden and former Democratic Rep. Patrick J. Kennedy called Clinton’s impeachment “a political lynching.”  Democratic Rep. Danny K. Davis even condemned the impeachment trial itself as “a lynching.”  Someone should have explained to Congressman Davis that lynching victims don’t get any trial, much less a trial presided over by the Chief Justice of the United States.  If, as all the long-tenured Democrats quoted above have said, impeachment must be the result of bipartisan consensus, and if an election should be overturned only when the voters have been convinced that it is necessary, it would stand to reason that any legitimate impeachment investigation should be conducted in the light of day, for all the world to see.  The Washington Post has assured us, after all,  that “Democracy dies in darkness.”  They would never lie, would they?  The Democrats in 1974 hated Richard Nixon as much as today’s Dems hate Donald Trump.  Yet in 1974, and again in 1998, the President was afforded the rights to counsel, to call witnesses, and to confront the witnesses that were produced.  And the hearings were public, very public.  In 1974, at a time before cable TV and 24 hour news networks, the Watergate Senate hearings and the House Judiciary hearings were televised live every day.  With only a few available channels, you couldn’t escape them.  We all saw John Dean give his testimony and Alexander Butterfield’s revelation that there were tapes of White House conversations.  At the end of that process, the result was inescapable, Nixon had to go.  But not this time.  The House has resisted allowing a vote on the commencement of an impeachment investigation, until yesterday’s phony vote to continue the Star Chamber inquisition.  Adam Schiff (for brains) is conducting his “impeachment inquiry” in a closed basement room in the Capitol.  Access to the room is strictly controlled by the Dems, it’s almost as though they’re hiding something.  They are.  They’re hiding the fact that they have no evidence that might compel Republican lawmakers, or the voting public, to the conclusion that there is good reason why this President should be removed.  The President has not been afforded the right to counsel, to see the testimony of witnesses, to call or question witnesses.  Republicans on the Committee can’t call witnesses either, and Republican Congressmen can’t even review transcripts of testimony unless they’re monitored by Democratic Committee staffers.  What are they afraid of?  They don’t want the truth to leak out.  If they had any real evidence of wrongdoing, it would be televised 24 hours a day.   Meanwhile, Democrats, on a daily basis, cherry-pick snippets of testimony that they consider harmful to the President.  Adam Schiff (for brains) has consistently lied to the public.  I don’t mean good old-fashioned Bill Clinton “spin.”  They’re just lying, and the lapdog media swears to their lies.  The popular consensus is that the House will eventually impeach Trump, no matter what.  Based on what evidence?  We don’t know.  Will Republican House members be permitted to see the so-called evidence?  We don’t know.  Will voters be able to evaluate what the House relies on to make up their own minds?  We don’t know that either.  Democracy dies in darkness?  You bet it does.  What’s going on is not a legitimate impeachment investigation, it’s double secret impeachment.  It’s impeachment by rumor, lie and artifice, and it’s dangerous.  This goes far beyond whether you like Donald Trump or you hate him.  This undermines our system of government, and trashes our Constitution.  It sends the message that your votes don’t count.  That is unacceptable.  Let the sun shine in and show us your cards.  You can’t bluff a President from office.

Recent events have brought to mind the term “Kangaroo Court.”  It’s a term we’ve all heard many times.  Kangaroo courts are sham legal proceedings which give the impression of a fair legal process, but in reality, don’t offer impartial justice, but always render verdicts that are decided in advance, and which invariably are against the accused.  No one really knows the origin of the term “kangaroo court.”  Kangaroos are native only to Australia, but there’s no evidence that the term comes from that continent.  Some resourceful souls have attributed “kangaroo court” to claim jumping  disputes during the California Gold Rush – hence the kangaroos.  That’s just a guess, but the jumping abilities of kangaroos was known in the USA by the early 1800s, so that could be right.  Indeed, the first known reference to a “kangaroo court” was in an American magazine in 1853, so the timing fits.  The kangaroo court comparison nowadays applies to the disgraceful performance of House Democrats in their so-called “impeachment inquiry.”  The Democrats have been trying to impeach President Trump ever since his election.  They really haven’t come up with a good reason, but that doesn’t seem to be a problem for them, as they are sure he must be guilty of something.  The whole sad episode is eerily reminiscent  of Franz Kafka’s 1925 novel, The Trial.  The Trial is the story of one Josef K., who wakes up one morning to discover that he’s been arrested on unnamed charges.  They keep insisting that he’s guilty, but they won’t tell him of what.  Throughout the novel, Josef struggles futilely against a secretive and tyrannical court system.  In the end, he’s executed by a knife to the heart.  Neither Josef K., nor the reader ever learns what crime he committed.  Fast forward to the 2019 House of Representatives, in the hands of  the secretive and tyrannical Democrats.  Speaker Nancy Pelosi knows that pursuing impeachment is liable to create a backlash that will jeopardize her control of the House, which was the result of the elections of more than 30 allegedly moderate Democrats in districts won by President Trump in 2016.  Democrats gained control in a mid-term election.  The expected greater turnout of Trump voters in 2020 could erase those gains if the phony moderates are forced to take sides on impeachment.  That’s why Tricky Nancy won’t allow a House vote to authorize an impeachment investigation.  Instead, Pelosi announced a continued “impeachment inquiry,”in other words a continuation of the witch hunt, based upon no evidence, or unspecified evidence, designed to damage the President.  Meanwhile, Pelosi has put the “inquiry” in the hands of Adam Schiff (for brains) and his Intelligence Committee, which operates behind closed doors.  It hears from witnesses chosen by Democrats, and questioned by  Democrats in secret, then has Democrat members leak selective portions of the testimony that make Donald T. seem guilty.  Guilty of what, you ask?  They won’t say.  They won’t permit Donald T. the right to counsel during the “inquiry,” they won’t permit him to call or question witnesses, nor have they given Donald T. the privilege of knowing precisely what he is to defend against.  For a group so dedicated to lecturing us on the need to preserve “American values,” the Democrats have gone out of their way to deny to the President every right upon which America was founded.  Even the most loathsome criminal (and I know this because I’ve defended a few of them) is guaranteed the right to counsel, the right to confront the witnesses against him, the right to call witnesses in his own behalf and procedural due process, that is the right to know what you are accused of and against which you must defend.  We afford these protections to terrorists, and even to foreign combatants, but according to the Democrats, not to the duly elected President of the United States.  You see, they tell us, this is not a legal proceeding, it political, so those rights don’t apply.  Not really.  Impeachment comes from the Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land.   And although it gives the House “the sole power of impeachment,” that doesn’t permit the House to impeach for no reason, or for any reason it may cook up.  A President may be impeached and removed from office only for treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.  Although the popular notion is that whatever the House decides is impeachable will suffice, that’s not the case.  Under the statutory interpretation doctrine known as ejusdem generis, when specific crimes (treason and bribery) are followed by general violations of law (other high crimes), the general violations are restricted to those of the type specified.  That’s been our history.  Andrew Johnson was impeached for violating a specific act of Congress.  Nixon would have been impeached for obstruction of justice, a high crime.  Likewise Bill Clinton – perjury and obstruction of justice.  Those charges were brought only after public hearings, during which the President was accorded all the rights mentioned above.  The Chief Justice of the United States presides over trials of the President.  Not a legal process, huh?  No Chief Justice of the United States would or should preside over a proceeding derived from a mockery of justice.  The bottom line is that the Democrats have no candidate who can beat President Trump in next year’s election, so they have decided to permit the intelligence community to stage a coup, and seek to inflict as much damage on him as possible.  For people who continue to decry perceived “threats to our democracy,” it is the Democrats who have a knife poised at the heart of our republic.

Don’t you just hate it when people who have nothing to do with politics, and who are painfully ignorant of current events, and of history in general, insert themselves into the public discourse?  Labron James of the L.A. Lakers is a recent example.   As a basketball player, Labron is a phenomenon.  He was so good as a high school player, that he didn’t even have to go to college, even for a year, to become the top NBA prospect.  In the NBA, he has excelled at a level which has made him the face of the sport.  So fully has Labron dominated his sport, that he has become known as King James, an appellation he uses as his Twitter handle.

The trouble is that Labron’s recent comments have proven that even a King is vulnerable to criticism.  It all started when Houston Rockets General Manager Daryl Morey posted a seemingly innocuous tweet to the Root of All Evil, Twitter.  The tweet read, “Fight for Freedom.  Stand with Hong Kong.”  To anyone who’s been paying attention, the tweet referred to the recent protests in Hong Kong.  A little background.  In 1897, the Chinese government gave the British the right to govern Hong Kong for 100 years.  Hong Kong became a thriving commercial center, indeed the preeminent center for Asian capitalism.  In 1997, the Communist Chinese government regained control of Hong Kong, under an agreement that was supposed to protect the rights of Hong Kong’s 7 million residents, permitting them to continue their normal lives through 2047; the so-called One Country, Two Systems policy.  Only problem is that the Chinese Communists were lying, as communists always do.  They don’t intend to permit Hong Kong to do business as usual, nor are they content to permit the residents of Hong Kong to enjoy the personal freedoms to which they are accustomed, and which the Commies promised to respect.  This has caused massive protests in Hong Kong, with some 2 million people taking part.  The Hong Kong residents are fighting for their lives, against a regime that imprisons millions in concentration camps, brutalizes religious and ethnic minorities, harvests the organs of those labelled “criminals,” and mandates late term abortions.  Against this backdrop, you’d think that an American citizen’s suggestion that freedom is preferable to slavery would be of no moment, but think again.  Morey works for the NBA and the NBA does business in China, and had some of its teams in China playing exhibition games at the time Morey dared to express the sentiment upon which the United States of America was founded.   The Chinese went nuts.  Even though NBA Commissioner Silver made a mealy-mouthed apology to the Chinese, they attacked him.  By “brazenly endorsing Morey’s secessionist-supporting tweet,” Mr. Silver has unleashed “Chinese people’s anger at such displays of thoughtless prejudice.”  China’s state-run CCTV suspended broadcasts of preseason games in China, saying “any speech that challenges national sovereignty and social stability is not within the scope of freedom of speech.”  Just for the record, the freedom to say only what the government approves of is NOT freedom of speech.  The NBA made Morey delete his tweet and apologize.  It seems the NBA makes lots of money in China broadcasting its games, and selling its merchandise, and the NBA has too many sneaker endorsement deals with shoe companies that manufacture and sell their shoes in China.   Enter Labron James, who makes some $36 million a year to stuff a ball in a hoop, and has endorsements, including one with Nike, reportedly worth a billion dollars to the King.  Labron jumped into the fray, on the side of the Communist Chinese.  “I don’t want to get in a word or sentence feud with Daryl Morey.  But I believe he wasn’t educated on the situation at hand and he spoke.  So many people could have been harmed, not only physically or financially, but emotionally and spiritually.  Just be careful what we tweet, what we say and what we do.  We do have freedom of speech, but there can be a lot of negative things that come with that too.”  Sounds like Labron’s “freedom of speech” is surprisingly like what the Chinese government calls “freedom.”  This was a strange stance, coming as it does from a person who has spoken out on the subject of injustice, previously tweeting, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”  “Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.”  So OK, as far as Labron’s concerned, black lives matter, but the lives of the millions living in Hong Kong don’t matter.  If Labron thought this through, and he obviously didn’t, he might have stayed out this fight.  People might be harmed physically?  So what, if a foreign government says, “Shut up or we’ll kill you” we should remain quiet?  “People might be harmed financially?”  There’s where Labron flirted with the truth.  There’s too much money to be made in China to permit an American citizen to enjoy the fruits of the First Amendment.  Let’s let Labron explain in his own words,  “We all talk about this freedom of speech.  Yes, we all do have freedom of speech, but at times there are ramifications for the negative that can happen when you’re not thinking about others, and you’re only thinking about yourself.”  Uh, Your Majesty, Daryl Morey was thinking about others.  He was thinking about the millions of oppressed people who exist under the yoke of Chinese tyranny.  Morey spoke out for the voiceless people of Hong Kong.  You spoke out to protect your own pocketbook.  I’d like to say, “You should have known better,” but you clearly don’t know.   As Clint Eastwood said as Inspector Harry Callahan in Magnum Force,  “A man’s GOT to know his limitations.”  You should limit yourself to stuffing a ball in a hoop.  You do that better than anyone else.  So please Labron, for the sake of the untold millions of truly oppressed people in China, shut up and dribble!  Otherwise, you’ll forfeit the title of King James, and henceforth will become Chairman Labron.

The late, great Jimmy Breslin once wrote a book entitled The Gang That Couldn’t Shoot Straight, which chronicled the exploits of a dysfunctional organized crime family in New York.  The book was made into a movie, featuring a young Robert DeNiro (before he became the under-educated, overpaid, foul-mouthed cafone he is today).  Currently, the House of Representatives is in the hands of an even more dysfunctional group of organized criminals, who falsely call themselves “Democrats.”  This Washington-based organized crime family is even more screwed-up than than the one Jimmy Breslin described.  The Democrats could fairly be called The Gang That Couldn’t Lie Straight, or how about La Cosa Stupid, LCS for short?  LCS was poised to retain the presidency in 2016.  They had a popular out-going president in Il Duce Obama, and they nominated Don Hillary to be their new Ladra di Tutti Ladre (that’s thief of all thieves). All they had to do was to beat a brash, amateur politician, who was ridiculed by all the experts, and who lacked support even among the leaders of his own Party.  LCS pulled out all the stops.  Their media employees denounced Trump around the clock.  Remember The Godfather, “We have newspaper people on the payroll, don’t we Tom?”  But that wasn’t good enough.  LCS used the CIA and the FBI to try to fix the election, and to create an “insurance policy” in the unlikely event that Donald Trump actually won.  Don Hillary sent her button men to Ukraine to dig up dirt on Paul Manafort, to be used to affect the 2016 election. (Sound familiar?).  Then Don Hillary hired a company (Fusion GPS) to get a foreign intelligence officer (Christopher Steele) to pay some Russian intelligence operatives for a pack of lies, later called the Steele Dossier.  (I thought it was wrong, nay impeachable, to use foreign officials to affect a U.S. election).  Then LCS got John Brennan and his CIA to use diplomats and foreign intelligence operatives from Italy, Malta, Great Britain and Australia to entrap George Papadopolous, allowing them to begin an investigation of him, and then used the lying Steele Dossier to get authorization from the FISA Court to conduct electronic surveillance on  Carter Page, on the Trump campaign, and on the Trump Administration after the election.  LCS used the FBI in the plot.  They induced the FISA Court to go along by simply lying; Comey, Rosenstein, and Sally Yates swore the dossier was verified, when it wasn’t.  Then James Comey went to President Trump and told him one truth and one lie; “The dossier is salacious and unverified,” and “You are not the subject of a criminal investigation.”  Trump caught on to Comey and fired him.  Enter Bob Mueller.  Co-conspirator Rosenstein brought Mueller to Trump to interview as Comey’s replacement.  The perfect choice if you want to enforce the FBI Code of Silence.  Trump says Mueller wanted the job, Mueller’s assistant confirms that, but Mueller testified before the Congress that he didn’t interview for the job.  The next day, he’s appointed Special Counsel.  Nearly two years of reshuffling the LCS lies, and Mueller’s investigation came to nothing.  Fear not.  LCS moved on to impeachment.  On what evidence?  We don’t need no stinkin’ evidence.  Congressman Al Green, he of the hair so greasy that his scalp could be fracked, has been trying to impeach Trump since January 2017.  Green usually lies, but has occasional slips, such as, “We have to impeach him or he’ll be reelected.” (That spinning sound you hear is coming from our Founding Founders’ graves).  LCS Capo Gerry, Il Pinguino, Nadler took a shot at impeachment, claiming Mueller found Russian collusion and obstruction of justice.  Those lies didn’t work.  So LCS Boss Nancy, Senza Denti (try Google translate), Pelosi turned to Capo Adam, Faccia di Culo, Schiff (for brains) to pursue the Ukrainian phone call caper, which in keeping with LCS policy, is another tissue of lies.  A Squealer, in LCS parlance, a “Rat,” made false claims about Trump’s phone call with the Ukranian President.  The Rat’s lies fell apart when Trump released the actual transcript of the call.  Other problems were that Schiff (for brains) lied about the Rat’s background, his/her basis of knowledge, and about the fact that the Rat gave him advance notice of the complaint. Schiff then went on TV and even lied about what was in the transcript of the call.  So they enlisted a second Squealer, Rat #2, to “take care of that thing.” (The first thing, or the second thing?)  LCS claimed Rat #2 was a Republican with first-hand knowledge, but whoops, that was a lie too.  Rat #2 is a Democrat, attached to the campaign of one of the Democrats running for President, who retained a mob lawyer who has represented other LCS members, including Don Hillary, Chuck, Faccia di Cazzo, Schumer, and former Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper (more about him later).  The LCS gang is getting nervous though, because AG Bill Barr and US Attorney John Durham (think of them as the Tom Dewey and Elliot Ness of this saga), are actively investigating all the wrongdoing perpetrated by all the LCS members and associates who tried to fix the 2016 election.  The footsteps are getting closer, as Durham is expanding his probe to cover the crimes committed after the election.  They must be worried, because Comey, Rosenstein, Joseph Mifsud, Christopher Steele and Sally Yates have gone to the mattresses.  John Brennan and James Clapper are still lying their asses off on TV, but Clapper, who bears a strong resemblance to the aliens from Mars Attacks –

went on TV the other day and mistakenly uttered a little white truth, “apparently what we were supposed to have done was to ignore the Russian interference, ignore the Russian meddling and the threat that it poses to us, and oh, by the way, blow off what the then commander in chief, President Obama, told us to do …”  Uh oh, has Clapper admitted what we already knew?  Is Il Duce Obama the true Godfather of La Cosa Stupid?  Just when he thought he was out, they pulled him back in.