Connect with us

Politics

Beto’s Impeachment Talk Will Leave You INFURIATED

Beto is pulling out all the stops in order to cash in on some “resistance” voter rage.

Published

on

Beto O'Rourke

In what is shaping to be one of the fiercest battles in modern midterm election history, democrats Beto O’Rourke is pulling out all the stops in an effort to upset Senate republican and former presidential candidate Ted Cruz.

Cruz, who was known for his heated battles with eventual-President Trump during the 2016 general election, is finding a feisty opponent O’Rourke, who has relied on his extensive knowledge of millennial interests in order to drum up support for his left wing policies throughout the Lone Star State.  Beto has even gone so far as to stage a number of skateboarding stunts in order to show the kids in Texas that he’s ostensibly “cool”.

During a Town Hall program last night on CNN, however, Beto’s tone took a darker turn in talking about the fate of the President going forward.

“There may be an open question as to whether the President, then the candidate, sought to collude with the Russian government in 2016,” O’Rourke said. “But to quote George Will — very conservative columnist — when we saw him on that stage in Helsinki defending Vladimir Putin, the head of the country that attacked our democracy in 2016 instead of this country, and its citizens and this amazing democracy, that was collusion in action.”
He continued, “You may have wondered when he fired James Comey, the principle investigator into what happened in that election, whether that was an attempt to obstruct justice. But when, by broad daylight on Twitter, he asked his attorney general, Jeff Sessions, to end the Russia investigation, I would say that’s obstruction in action.”
O’Rourke then said he likens impeachment to an indictment.
“There is enough there to proceed to a trial,” he said.
O’Rourke said he “would not prejudge the outcome of that trial.”
“All I am saying is, there’s enough there,” he said. “I know that this is not politically easy or convenient to talk about, but 242 years into this experiment … nothing guarantees us a 243rd or a 244th.”
O’Rourke’s comments come at a crucial time in American history, with the 2018 midterm elections only weeks away.  Democrats have floated the idea of impeaching the President if they are to gain enough seats in Congress to do so.

Opinion

Justice Department Hints at Trouble for States Engaging in Election Audits

They don’t want other locales getting any ideas from Maricopa County

Published

on

In Arizona, an ongoing and auxiliary “audit” of the 2020 election results has kept proponents of the “Stop The Steal” movement on the edge of their seats. These folks believe that there were major, fraudulent issues with the electoral system itself, and they believe that a reexamination of the processes and networks involved in counting the vote will provide enough evidence to force Congress to act. Some may even have found themselves wondering if an end to the audit might come just days ahead of Mike Lindell’s “reinstatement day” prediction of August 13th – providing a bit of confluence to some of their theories about the future of Donald Trump’s political career. The Justice Department, on the other hand, isn’t too thrilled about the idea of these audits spreading to other states, and they’re flexing a little of their electoral power to keep other locales from getting any ideas. The Justice Department on Wednesday issued another warning aimed at states conducting or considering audits of ballots tallied in last year’s election, reminding election authorities that allowing ballots to be mishandled can violate federal law. While the Biden administration “guidance” document carries no formal legal weight and may not strike fear into local officials, the Justice Department used the release of the legal analysis to press their campaign of saber-rattling against Republican-led audits of the 2020 vote in Arizona and other states, as well as voting changes many GOP-controlled states are pursuing as part of purported anti-fraud efforts. Then came the mobster-esque verbiage. “Jurisdictions have to be careful not to let those ballots be defaced or mutilated or lost or destroyed as part of an audit,” said a Justice Department official who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity. “This document puts down a marker that says the Justice Department is concerned…

Continue Reading

Opinion

DOJ Gives Jan 6th Committee Green Light to Call Trump Officials as Witnesses

But there’s a good chance that this will backfire spectacularly.

Published

on

The Democrats steering the select committee investigating January 6th have a very tight line to keep their toes on. On one hand, they know that they aren’t going to get another chance at this investigation, particularly as the GOP continues to downplay the impact of the event itself.  But they also mustn’t sway the hearing too far to the left either, lest they wish to be accused of partisan hackery. One of the simplest ways for the investigation to get a bad rap among conservatives would be to spend a great deal of time on subjects that were already covered in Donald Trump second impeachment trial, in which he was acquitted of “inciting” the insurrection of that fateful day. But this could prove difficult for the overzealous among them, especially after the DOJ has now dangled one hellacious carrot in front of them. Former Trump administration officials can testify to Congress about Donald Trump’s role in the deadly January attack on the Capitol and his efforts to subvert the results of the 2020 election, the justice department (DoJ) has said in a letter obtained by the Guardian. The move by the justice department to decline to assert executive privilege for Trump’s acting attorney general, Jeffrey Rosen, clears the path for other top former officials to also testify to congressional committees investigating the Capitol attack without fear of repercussions. The justice department authorised witnesses to appear specifically before the two committees. But a DoJ official, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters, said they expected that approval to extend to the 6 January select committee that began proceedings on Tuesday. And while the Justice Department may think that they are doing the Democrats a favor here, it is somewhat likely that this new avenue of pursuit will take…

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week