;
Connect with us

Opinion

DAVIDSON: Democrats Are Shamefully Subverting & Weaponizing Impeachment

Straight facts.

Jeff Davidson

Published

on

Impeachment was supposed to be a vital and rarely used mechanism used by Congress, for the protection of the people, in response to egregious acts committed by the U.S. president or others in government. Instead, Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff, Chuck Schumer, Jerry Nadler, and all the rest of the vicious Democrats in Congress, as well as six RINOs have used it as a convenient weapon of choice against Donald Trump because they hate him with a passion that exceeds all rationality.

Note to Democrats and RINOs: Hatred is insufficient grounds for drafting articles of impeachment. If so, impeachment proceedings for Obama would have been initiated ASAP.

Bogus from the Start

The first Trump impeachment over a phone call, which was part of the public record, had numerous people on line at the same time. Donald Trump had no quid pro quo with the Ukraine government. Former Vice President Joe Biden did. He and his family pocketed millions from his pay-for-play schemes with Ukraine, Russia, Kazakhstan, Romania, and China.

take our poll - story continues below

Is Biden's Vaccine Mandate Unconstitutional?

  • Is Biden's Vaccine Mandate Unconstitutional?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

The Democrats all knew this, but they didn’t care. Impeachment was a ready made tool, sitting there, ready for their use. Never mind that their bogus assault upset 244 years of American governance. Never mind that it contorts the effectiveness and reputation of Congress, the trust of the people, and centuries old protocols.

The venal, vindictive Nancy Pelosi chose to proceed anyway, because after all, Donald Trump must be stopped, right? He only created the greatest economy that the country had seen in decades, increased minority employment and home ownership in unprecedented ways, stopped ISIS dead cold in their tracks, helped peace break out in the Middle East, promulgated an endless supply of energy so that we became not only independent, but an energy exporter, and so on.

One could fill an encyclopedia with what Donald Trump accomplished in four years. None of that matters to Nancy Pelosi and Company; they need to permanently harm Trump politically. So, following the Capitol riot which, has repeatedly been proven that Trump did not incite, she invoked impeachment once again.

The Theatre of the Absurd

Here in February, we have Donald Trump ‘voted’ out of office as a result of massive fraud and being accused of something that he did not do. Make no mistake, Pelosi’s intent as dangerous to the country as anything that we’ve witnessed since our founding. She’s using impeachment as a weapon to punish an adversary, devoid of evidence, fairness, and any semblance of ethics.

Contemplate this: If Donald Trump or anybody else in America, for that matter, plans to give a public presentation at a rally or protest, and people infiltrate the event are we to hold responsible those sponsoring or speaking at the event? In Washington, on January 6th, President Trump’s rally was infiltrated by members of Antifa, as well as several right-wing groups. It has been proven that in advance these groups intended to disrupt the day’s proceedings, in one way or another.

Correspondence and communication between group members show that they intended to march on the Capitol, and cause whatever disturbance they could. If we blame Donald Trump for these intruders, and their criminal actions, and decide that he is liable, we are taking a path unlike any other taken before: There is no way to protect our First Amendment rights after.

All speakers, at all times, forevermore, could be subject to prosecution as a result of the behavior and activities of those who show up at an event, and, most chillingly, as a result of the behavior and activities of those otherwise seeming to have been influenced by the speaker at any time.

Raindrops Falling on Everyone’s Head

Not surprisingly, when you unleash a storm as Nancy Pelosi and company have, and overturn centuries of precedence, be prepared for what happens thereafter.

Only a single day after Biden was sworn into office, Congresswoman Marjorie Greene (R-Ga.) filed articles of impeachment. And why not? Joe has a long, slimy history of corruption while in office. As vice president of the United States, he besmirched the responsibilities and protocols of his office. The numerous times he engaged in pay-for-play schemes, with his son Hunter as a front man, has been well documented.

As President, however, Biden would have to make some kind of huge, instantaneously transgression to justifiably be impeached.

Pelosi and the Democrats, suffering from a totaling crippling case of Trump Derangement Syndrome, can’t see past their own hatred as to the long-term harm they do to America.

Opinion

Pentagon Reverses Statement on Drone Strike, Admits to Killing Civilians

Has the Biden administration done ANYTHING right in Afghanistan?!

Published

on

In the chaotic last few days of the American occupation of Afghanistan, there were a lot moving parts and quite a bit of calamity.

The Biden administration’s abrupt choice to expedite the withdrawal of US assets caused the Afghan Security Forces to essentially vaporize, and the Taliban conquered the entire country in a meager 11 days.  In the process, hundreds died, including 13 members of the US military after a series of terror attacks amid the throngs of people trying to flee via the airport in Kabul.

On top of that, the Pentagon was carrying out drone strikes meant to suppress the capabilities of new terror group ISIS-K, but, instead, killed innocent children.

Now, after initially denying that the strike was a failure, the Pentagon has decided to come clean.

take our poll - story continues below

Is Biden's Vaccine Mandate Unconstitutional?

  • Is Biden's Vaccine Mandate Unconstitutional?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Head of the United States Central Command Gen. Kenneth F. McKenzie Jr. announced Friday that it is unlikely any ISIS-K members were killed in a Kabul drone strike on August 29, which led to multiple civilian casualties.

“We now assess that it is unlikely that the vehicle and those who died were associated with ISIS-K or a direct threat to US forces,” McKenzie said of the airstrike at a briefing, following an investigation by the Military.

“This strike was taken in the earnest belief that it would prevent an imminent threat to our forces and the evacuees at the airport, but it was a mistake and I offer my sincere apology,” Mckenzie said, adding that he is “fully responsible for this strike and this tragic outcome.”

DOD officials also prepared a statement to the family of the deceased.

“On behalf of the men and women of the Department of Defense, I offer my deepest condolences to surviving family members of those who were killed, including Mr. Ahmadi, and to the staff of Nutrition and Education International, Mr. Ahmadi’s employer,” Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III said in a lengthy statement on the investigation’s findings. “We now know that there was no connection between Mr. Ahmadi and ISIS-Khorasan, that his activities on that day were completely harmless and not at all related to the imminent threat we believed we faced, and that Mr. Ahmadi was just as innocent a victim as were the others tragically killed.

“We apologize, and we will endeavor to learn from this horrible mistake,” Austin added, saying that officials “will scrutinize not only what we decided to do — and not do — on the 29th of August, but also how we investigated those outcomes.”

The incident is but one of a long list of failures by the Biden administration in recent weeks, and certainly isn’t going to throw cold water on the growing calls for impeachment.

In the chaotic last few days of the American occupation of Afghanistan, there were a lot moving parts and quite a bit of calamity. The Biden administration’s abrupt choice to expedite the withdrawal of US assets caused the Afghan Security Forces to essentially vaporize, and the Taliban conquered the entire country in a meager 11 days.  In the process, hundreds died, including 13 members of the US military after a series of terror attacks amid the throngs of people trying to flee via the airport in Kabul. On top of that, the Pentagon was carrying out drone strikes meant to suppress the capabilities of new terror group ISIS-K, but, instead, killed innocent children. Now, after initially denying that the strike was a failure, the Pentagon has decided to come clean. Head of the United States Central Command Gen. Kenneth F. McKenzie Jr. announced Friday that it is unlikely any ISIS-K members were killed in a Kabul drone strike on August 29, which led to multiple civilian casualties. “We now assess that it is unlikely that the vehicle and those who died were associated with ISIS-K or a direct threat to US forces,” McKenzie said of the airstrike at a briefing, following an investigation by the Military. “This strike was taken in the earnest belief that it would prevent an imminent threat to our forces and the evacuees at the airport, but it was a mistake and I offer my sincere apology,” Mckenzie said, adding that he is “fully responsible for this strike and this tragic outcome.” DOD officials also prepared a statement to the family of the deceased. “On behalf of the men and women of the Department of Defense, I offer my deepest condolences to surviving family members of those who were killed, including Mr. Ahmadi, and to the…

Continue Reading

Opinion

Even More Trouble Arrives for AOC After Met Gala Dress Stunt Flops

This one is going to sting a little.

Published

on

Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is quite familiar with the way in which the media cycle works, and her place in it.  While her politics aren’t always in tune with the center of our country, her use of social media to cultivate a narrative is nigh unmatched, and it’s something that has to be taken into consideration whenever she catches a headline.

This is all a part of the show, in other words.

This week’s AOC stunt came to us from the posh, $30,000 per ticket Met Gala, at which the precocious progressive from New York was seen sporting a white dress with gaudy red writing on it.  The message?  “Tax The Rich”.

Yes, at an event that costs $30,000 to get in the door.

take our poll - story continues below

Is Biden's Vaccine Mandate Unconstitutional?

  • Is Biden's Vaccine Mandate Unconstitutional?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

But AOC didn’t pay to be there.  She was a “guest of the museum”, which is a clever trick to get her around all those “impermissible gift” laws that we have in this country.

That’s why the Democrat was almost immediately slapped with an ethics complaint after the stunt.  This week, she picked up yet another.

The complaint from the National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC) to the Office of Congressional Ethics alleged that Ocasio-Cortez improperly accepted tickets from a table sponsor for herself and her boyfriend.

House rules allow members to take free tickets to charity events directly from event organizers, and The Post reported Tuesday that AOC and boyfriend Riley Roberts were directly invited by the Metropolitan Museum of Art.

However, the NLPC argued that “it is the table sponsor who is gifting or underwriting a coveted seat to AOC at the Gala.

“And if … the table where AOC sat was one paid for by one of [the] corporations attending the event, such as Instagram or Facebook, AOC has received a prohibited gift from the corporation that also lobbies Congress.”

The dress and the scene caused a bit of an uproar when it first hit social media, as it didn’t take long for users to point out the obvious irony of it all.

Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is quite familiar with the way in which the media cycle works, and her place in it.  While her politics aren’t always in tune with the center of our country, her use of social media to cultivate a narrative is nigh unmatched, and it’s something that has to be taken into consideration whenever she catches a headline. This is all a part of the show, in other words. This week’s AOC stunt came to us from the posh, $30,000 per ticket Met Gala, at which the precocious progressive from New York was seen sporting a white dress with gaudy red writing on it.  The message?  “Tax The Rich”. Yes, at an event that costs $30,000 to get in the door. But AOC didn’t pay to be there.  She was a “guest of the museum”, which is a clever trick to get her around all those “impermissible gift” laws that we have in this country. That’s why the Democrat was almost immediately slapped with an ethics complaint after the stunt.  This week, she picked up yet another. The complaint from the National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC) to the Office of Congressional Ethics alleged that Ocasio-Cortez improperly accepted tickets from a table sponsor for herself and her boyfriend. House rules allow members to take free tickets to charity events directly from event organizers, and The Post reported Tuesday that AOC and boyfriend Riley Roberts were directly invited by the Metropolitan Museum of Art. However, the NLPC argued that “it is the table sponsor who is gifting or underwriting a coveted seat to AOC at the Gala. “And if … the table where AOC sat was one paid for by one of [the] corporations attending the event, such as Instagram or Facebook, AOC has received a prohibited gift from the…

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week