Category Archives: Impeachment

Impeach-Trump Congressman Jerry Nadler drools

Rep. Jerrold “Jerry” Lewis Nadler (D-NY) has been in Congress (House of Representatives) for 27 years, since 1992.

Born into a Jewish family in Brooklyn, New York, Nadler is the chair of the House Juidiciary Committee that has been conducting the impeach-Trump “investigation” and hearings. On September 24, 2019, Rep. Lance Gooden (R-Texas) proposed a resolution to remove Nadler from his position as chairman of House Judiciary committee, accusing him of unlawfully beginning impeachment proceedings before the House has given the committee authorization.

At only 5’4″ in height, Nadler was morbidly obese, weighing 338 pounds. To lose weight, he had surgery to remove part of his stomach in 2002, and in 2003, had another surgery that bypassed a section of his small intestine, which resulted in a loss of more than 100 pounds. (AP)

Nadler is 72 years old, and has been seen napping during the House impeachment hearings.

He also drools.

At the impeachment hearing on Monday, December 9, 2019, Nadler, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, was caught on camera drooling. (H/t tweeter @CHIZMAGA)

Hey, you Demonrats. You must be so proud.

See also “DC pharmacy delivers Alzheimer’s drugs to Congress”.

~Eowyn

Drudge Report has gone to the dark side. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by a military veteran!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Rep. Karen Bass (CA) says house open to impeaching President Trump again if he wins 2020

This womyn represents Culver City and parts of Los Angeles – the place where the homeless death rate has jumped by more than a third.

Instead of focusing on her sh*thole community, the congresswomen is – of course – intent on focusing on her TDS.

Hopefully demorats are in for a big surprise in 2020.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

The real quid pro quo: Joe Biden brags of Obama administration withholding $1B aid unless Ukraine fired prosecutor investigating Joe’s son Hunter

Beginning in September 2019, House Democrats launched a formal impeachment inquiry into President Trump over “whistleblower” Eric Ciaramella‘s accusation that Trump had issued a quid pro quo, i.e., a threat, to withhold military aid to Ukraine as a pressure tactic to force the Ukrainian government to investigate allegations that Joe Biden’s son Hunter benefited financially from the firing of that same Ukrainian prosecutor. 

Note: Quid pro quo is a Latin phrase which means an exchange of goods or services, in which one transfer is contingent upon the other; “a favor for a favor”.

President Trump did no such thing, as proven by the transcript of his phone call with Ukraine President Zelensky, which had been confirmed by Zelensky himself. See:

Nor is it improper for President Trump to ask the Ukrainian goverment to investigate possible corruption on the part of the Bidens. See “1998 US-Ukraine treaty on mutual assistance in criminal matters proves it’s another Democrat witch-hunt”.

Democrats have a predilection to psychological projection — accusing others of what something they themselves did or are doing.

It turns out that when he was Obama’s Vice President, Joe Biden threatened Ukraine’s then-President Petro Poroshenko that if he didn’t fire Ukraine’s State Prosecutor Viktor Shokin — who was investigating the founder of natural gas company Burisma Holdings, where Joe’s son Hunter Biden had a lucrative role on the board — Ukraine would not get a billion dollar loan guarantee from the United States.

Biden bragged about making that threat on January 23, 2018, on a panel at the Council on Foreign Relations panel.

Below is a video of Biden bragging about the quid pro quo, followed by the transcript of what he said.

Beginning at the 0:16 mark, the interviewer asks Biden:

“This [Trump] administration, unlike the [Obama] administration you worked in [as Vice President of the USA], decided to provide limited defense articles to Ukraine, do you think that was a wise decision and, more broadly, do you see any scope for any sort of a deal on eastern Ukraine?”

Biden replies (0:31 mark):

“The answer is yes, I think it was a wise decision. But then again, I was pushing that for two years before we left. So, and the reason is, I think, the more you upped the ante, the cost to Russia for their aggression, I mean as you all know this better than anybody, um, you know, the one big lie going on about Ukraine back in and and and the rest of Russia is that no Russian soldiers are engaged, they’re not dying, no body bags are coming home etc., because there’s overwhelming opposition on the part of the body politic and Russia for engagement in Ukraine in a military sense. Um, do I think the [inaudible] has potential to be solved, but it takes two things. One of those things is missing now, and that is I’m desperately concerned about the backsliding on the part of Kiev in terms of corruption. They made—I mean, I’ll give you one concrete example. I was—not I, but it just happened to be that was the assignment I got. I got all the good ones. And so I got Ukraine. And I remember going over, convincing our team, our leaders to—convincing that we should be providing for loan guarantees. And I went over, I guess, the 12th, 13th time to Kiev. And I was supposed to announce that there was another billion-dollar loan guarantee. And I had gotten a commitment from [President Petro] Poroshenko and from [Prime Minister Arseniy] Yatsenyuk that they would take action against the state prosecutor. And they didn’t.

So they said they had—they were walking out to a press conference. I said, nah, I’m not going to—or, we’re not going to give you the billion dollars. They said, you have no authority. You’re not the president, the president said. I said, call him.

(Audience laughter)

I said, I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars. I said, you’re not getting the billion. I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. (Laughter.) He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time.”

If YouTube takes down the video, you can watch it on the Wall Street Journal, here.

From Fox News, Oct. 2, 2019:

The fired prosecutor at the center of the Ukraine controversy said during a private interview with President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani earlier this year that he was told to back off an investigation involving a natural gas firm that was linked to Joe Biden’s son, according to details of that interview that were handed over to Congress by the State Department’s inspector general Wednesday.

Fox News obtained a copy of Giuliani’s notes from his January 2019 interview with fired Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin in which he claimed that his “investigations stopped out of fear of the United States.”

“Mr. Shokin attempted to continue the investigations but on or around June or July of 2015, the U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey R. Pyatt told him that the investigation has to be handled with white gloves, which according to Mr. Shokin, that implied do nothing,” the notes from the interview stated. The notes also claimed Shokin was told Biden had held up U.S. aid to Ukraine over the investigation.

Shokin was fired in April 2016, and his case was “closed by the current Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko,” according to the notes. Despite his claims, Shokin, on both sides of the Atlantic, had been widely accused of corruption.

~Eowyn

Drudge Report has gone to the dark side. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by a military veteran!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

First children are off limits: Unless you have an extreme case of TDS

My headline is for this post is subtle…and polite and kind.

Because what I really want to tell this “Constitutional Scholar” who made a joke at the expense of 13-year-old Barron Trump yesterday would be really, really inappropriate.

At the impeachment inquiry hearings the demorats had no evidence so they paraded a bunch of their cherry-picked “Constitutional Scholars” to educate us dumb-folk on what is grounds for impeaching President Trump.

The demorats thought it’d be a good idea to trot out the Ivy League Marxist lawyer Pamela Karlan.

About Professor Karlan, from Wikipedia: “…a professor of law at Stanford Law School. A leading legal scholar on voting rights and political process, she served as U.S. Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Voting Rights in the United States Department of Justice Civil Division from 2014 to 2015.”

What is not mentioned in Wikipedia’s page is that Professor Karlan is a biased, liberal womyn and partisan hack willing to take a shot at a 13-year-old boy because #OrangeManBad.

Watch her make a joke about President Trump’s son instead of addressing any ACTUAL crime our president may have committed:

Remember the good ‘ol days when “criticizing the ‘first children’ was off-limits. Yeah, good times.

You demorats are SUCH HYPOCRITES.

While this “scholarly” womyn attacks a 13-year-old boy (and her momma-bear First Lady Melania Trump who tries to protect her son) you demorats VICIOUSLY attack Melania.

This is to be expected from the “oh, so tolerant” left.

What petty, petty HYPOCRITES you are.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

The ‘Impeachment Witchhunt’ Caption Contest

This Caption Contest is now closed.

———

This is the 214th world-famous FOTM Caption Contest!

Here’s the image (fill in the blank):

You know the drill:

  • Enter the contest by submitting your caption as a comment on this thread (scroll down until you see the “LEAVE A REPLY” box).
  • The winner of the Caption Contest will get a gorgeous Award Certificate of Excellence and a year’s free subscription to FOTM:D
  • FOTM writers will vote for the winner.
  • Any captions proffered by FOTM writers, no matter how brilliant (ha ha), will not be considered. :(

This contest will be closed in a week, at the end of next Tuesday, December 10, 2019.

To get the contest going, here’s my caption:

Because we Democrats are sore losers.

See also:

For the winner of our last Caption Contest, go here.

~Eowyn

Drudge Report has gone to the dark side. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by a military veteran!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

President Trump pokes fun at Schiff while pardoning Thanksgiving turkeys

The turkeys President Trump pardoned are named “Bread” and “Butter!”

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Robert Redford believes Trump’s presidency is a monarchy and he’s “deeply disturbed”

As we get closer to 2020, the unhinged demorats are letting their imaginations run super wild.

Since President Trump was elected, they have vowed to remove him from office. Three years later, with impeachment proceedings that aren’t moving fast enough for them; the left are in panic mode.

Imagine having a scab for three years that will not heal nor can you scratch it or remove it. The daily pain and reminder of your ailment eats away at your every move. Your misery consumes every thought and transfers into delusional thoughts that demorat-loving media gladly promote.

Such must be the case for TDS-infected actor Robert Redford.

He’s written an opinion piece for NBC News on their new platform called, “THINK.”

THINK is NBC News op-eds, in depth analyses and essays about news and current events. They say you can find opinions that will make you think differently and deeply about the world and our place in it.

Yeah, riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

I perused THINK and found it is mostly full of progressive narratives. Appears their only goal is to help elect a demorat president in 2020. Would you expect anything less from a network that intentionally killed Ronan Farrow’s story on Clinton buddy and predator Weinstein?

Now THINK has given Redford a platform to whine about dictator-like President Trump and the “crisis” we are up against. He blathers on about how President Trump is single-handedly threatening the sacred rule of law, our essential freedom of the press and our precious freedoms of speech.

Somehow he manages to get through his diatribe without stating one piece of evidence.

Read his whole opinion piece here.

At the end, Redford desires for us to rededicate ourselves to voting for truth, character and integrity in our representatives (no matter which side we’re on).

Hard pass. If I want to educate myself on “truth,” “character” and “integrity,” it won’t be coming from NBC News or hypocrite Redford.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Congresswoman claims President Trump “trying to use the court system” is “obstruction of justice”

These demorats are just now making up things as they go along.

Congress critter Pramila Jayapal represents Washington’s 7th congressional district, which includes most of Seattle. That might explain how someone this stupid got into an elected office. She obviously didn’t major in law as she has an MBA from Northwestern University and had a very brief career as a financial analyst. She serves on the both the Judiciary and Budget committees.

Let THAT sink in: Someone who serves on the Judiciary Committee states that using the court system is an obstruction of justice.

In the above video, Jayapal claims the evidence was “clear” and was confirmed in “multiple devastating ways for the president.”

Yet of course, she didn’t list one piece of that evidence. Instead she goes on to say, “Trump trying to use the court system” is “obstruction of justice.”

So now exercising your right to a fair trial in court is a crime?

Obviously this congress critter doesn’t believe that due process applies to #OrangeManBad nor does she understand how the three branches of government work.

No wonder these “impeachment proceedings” haven’t had the desired effect demorats had hoped for.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

TDS is real: Liberals cannot put politics aside to enjoy family during Thanksgiving

Imagine how miserable it must be to go through life hating family members because they disagree with your politics. Liberals really aren’t capable of co-existing with anyone who disagrees with them.

Case in Point: I came across this tweet yesterday from some no-name, blue check-marked Tony Posnanski: “I will be changing my wifi password to “IMPEACH45” this Thursday so that my MAGA family members have to put that in their devices to have some of my delicious WiFi.”

Some of the replies verify that liberals are a very intolerant and childish bunch:

“My MAGA family members no longer come over for Thanksgiving. The day after the 2016 election, I cancelled our Thanksgiving gathering because I knew I could not handle their gloating, and they have not spoken to me since. I guess that is something to truly be thankful for.

“I may have on occasion blocked FoxNews with parental controls on our TV from my … well… parents.”

“Love it. One day when nobody was around, I password locked Fox News on the lobby TV at my Dad’s dialysis clinic.”

“Brilliant. I “parental control” Fox News off the remotes which leaves them scratching their heads, bless their hearts

“Everybody has MAGA family. Some of us are lucky enough that the worst of the MAGA red hats died this year. (Step in-law. Not someone we actually cared about.)

I blocked fox so my MAGAt uncle can’t watch it when he visits my grandma. The code to bypass the block is his birthday and three years later he still hasn’t figured it out.”

Pettiness ain’t very pretty…

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

New Rasmussen Poll Predicts Violence Regardless of Trump Impeachment Outcome

 

The Daily Wire Sunday (Nov. 24) reported the results of a new Rasmussen poll that found a majority of likely voters believe violence will erupt regardless of how the impeachment of Present Trump plays out. A striking percentage of those polled believed that members the other political party “lack the traits to be considered fully human—they behave like animals.”  A smaller percentage thought members of the other political party were “downright evil.”

There is an old Chinese curse that goes something like this: 願你生活在有趣的時代 May you live in interesting times.

From DailyWire.com

By  Frank Camp

On Thursday, Rasmussen Reports released a survey showing that a majority of “likely voters” believe that removing the president from office via impeachment would “lead to violence.” Perhaps more shocking, a larger majority believe that anti-Trump individuals will “resort to violence.” The survey was conducted between November 18-19 on 1,000 “likely voters.”

Specifically, the survey asked respondents: “How concerned are you that President Trump’s impeachment and removal from office will lead to violence?” Rasmussen reports that 53% of respondents indicated that they are concerned. 24% are “very concerned.”

The survey also asked: “How concerned are you that those opposed to President Trump’s policies will resort to violence?” 59% of respondents indicated that they are concerned. 34% are “very concerned.”

Democrats don’t appear nearly as worried about opposition violence.

“While 40% of Democrats are very concerned that those opposed to Trump’s policies will resort to violence, just 18% feel that way about his supporters if the president is removed from office,” according to Rasmussen. When asked about the likelihood of a new “civil war” occurring within “the next five years,” 31% of respondents said that such a scenario is likely. 9% said it was “very likely.”

Awareness of political aggression and politically-motivated violence seems to have moved to the forefront of America’s collective consciousness.

According to a Pew Research survey conducted in April and May, 85% of respondents believe that the “nature of political debate … has become more negative in recent years.”

An October 2018 survey conducted by McLaughlin & Associates on “800 full-time undergraduates” found that a significant number of students believe that violence is justified as a preventative measure against “hate speech.”

According to The Wall Street Journal, the survey asked students if they agreed or disagreed with the following statement: “If someone is using hate speech or making racially charged comments, physical violence can be justified to prevent this person from espousing their hateful views.” 33% said that they “agree” with the statement.

In early-October, Nathan Kalmoe, assistant professor of political communication at Louisiana State University, tweeted out some troubling information from a YouGov survey:

“In a 2019 YouGov survey w/ @LilyMasonPhD, 70% of Reps & 56% of Dems saw the other party as “a serious threat to the United States & its people.”

55% of Reps & 44% of Dems said the other party is “not just worse for politics—they are downright evil.” 34% of Reps & 27% of Dems said the other party “lack the traits to be considered fully human—they behave like animals.”

A small but disturbing percentage of respondents indicated favorability toward “political violence,” according to Kalmoe. 55% of Reps & 44% of Dems said the other party is “not just worse for politics—they are downright evil.”

34% of Reps & 27% of Dems said the other party “lack the traits to be considered fully human—they behave like animals.”

We also asked several questions about attitudes toward political violence. Here’s one. Other items asked about threatening leaders & citizens, & support for violence if your party loses in 2020. You can see most (but not all) people rejected partisan violence today.

The survey asked: “How much do you feel it is justified for [own party] to use violence in advancing their political goals these days?”

While a strong 87.3% of respondents said “not at all,” 5.2% said “a moderate amount,” 4.7% said “a little,” 1.5% said “a great deal,” and 1.3% said “a lot.”

That means that out of all respondents, approximately 12.7% were at least a little bit comfortable with the idea of using violence as a tool of political power.

The Rasmussen survey report can be viewed here:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/november_2019/voters_fear_violence_from_trump_s_foes_more_than_his_supporters

~ Grif

Please follow and like us:
error0