20191219: Mitch Becomes a Statesman, with responses from Schumer, Pelosi, McCarthy

It was Mitch McConnell’s finest hour.

Pushed to make a stand by rabid behavior of Lawfare Dems and Nancy Pelosi, Mitch sheds his RINO NeverTrump skin, and takes to the podium in the well of the Senate. What followed was the speech of a Statesman.

Link to transcript: https://www.republicanleader.senate.gov/newsroom/remarks/mcconnell-remarks-on-house-democrats-impeachment-of-president-trump-

McConnell Remarks on House Democrats’ Impeachment of President Trump

‘This is by far the thinnest basis for any House-passed presidential impeachment in American history… The prosecutors are getting cold feet in front of the entire country and second-guessing whether they even want to go to trial… It will be an unprecedented constitutional crisis if the Senate agrees to set the bar this low forever.’

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) delivered the following remarks today on the Senate floor regarding House Democrats’ impeachment vote:

‘Last night House Democrats finally did what they decided to do long ago: They voted to impeach President Trump. 

‘Over the last 12 weeks, House Democrats have conducted the most rushed, least thorough, and most unfair impeachment inquiry in modern history.

‘Now their slapdash process has concluded in the first purely partisan presidential impeachment since the wake of the Civil War. The opposition to impeachment was bipartisan. Only one part of one faction wanted this outcome.

‘The House’s conduct risks deeply damaging the institutions of American government. This particular House of Representatives has let its partisan rage at this particular President create a toxic new precedent that will echo into the future.

‘That’s what I want to discuss now: The historic degree to which House Democrats have failed to do their duty — and what it will mean for the Senate to do ours.

‘Let’s start at the beginning. Let’s start with the fact that Washington Democrats made up their minds to impeach President Trump since before he was even inaugurated

‘Here’s a reporter in April 2016. Quote, “Donald Trump isn’t even the Republican nominee yet… [but] ‘Impeachment’ is already on the lips of pundits, newspaper editorials, constitutional scholars, and even a few members of Congress.” 

‘On Inauguration Day 2017, this headline in the Washington Post: “The campaign to impeach President Trump has begun.” That was day one.

‘In April 2017, three months into the presidency, a senior House Democrat said “I’m going to fight every day until he’s impeached.” That was three months in. 

‘In December 2017, two years ago, Congressman Jerry Nadler was openly campaigning to be ranking member on House Judiciary specifically because he was an expert on impeachment.

‘This week wasn’t even the first time House Democrats have introduced articles of impeachment. It was the seventh time.

‘They started less than six months after the president was sworn in.

‘They tried to impeach President Trump for being impolite to the press… For being mean to professional athletes… For changing President Obama’s policy on transgender people in the military.

‘All of these things were “high crimes and misdemeanors” according to Democrats.

‘This wasn’t just a few people. Scores of Democrats voted to move forward with impeachment on three of those prior occasions.

‘So let’s be clear. The House’s vote yesterday was not some neutral judgment that Democrats came to reluctantly. It was the pre-determined end of a partisan crusade that began before President Trump was even nominated, let alone sworn in.

‘For the very first time in modern history we have seen a political faction in Congress promise from the moment a presidential election ended that they would find some way to overturn it. 

‘A few months ago, Democrats’ three-year-long impeachment in search of articles found its way to the subject of Ukraine. And House Democrats embarked on the most rushed, least thorough, and most unfair impeachment inquiry in modern history.

‘Chairman Schiff’s inquiry was poisoned by partisanship from the outset. Its procedures and parameters were unfair in unprecedented ways.

‘Democrats tried to make Chairman Schiff into a de facto Special Prosecutor, notwithstanding the fact that he is a partisan member of Congress who’d already engaged in strange and biased behavior.

‘He scrapped precedent to cut the Republican minority out of the process. He denied President Trump the same sorts of procedural rights that Houses of both parties had provided to past presidents of both parties.

‘President Trump’s counsel could not participate in Chairman Schiff’s hearings, present evidence, or cross-examine witnesses.

‘The House Judiciary Committee’s crack at this was even more ahistorical. It was like the Speaker called up Chairman Nadler and ordered one impeachment, rush delivery please.

‘That Committee found no facts of its own and did nothing to verify the Schiff report. Their only witnesses were liberal law professors and congressional staffers.

‘There’s a reason the impeachment inquiry that led to President Nixon’s resignation required about 14 months of hearings. 14 months. In addition to a special prosecutor’s investigation.

‘With President Clinton, the independent counsel’s inquiry had been underway for years before the House Judiciary Committee dug in. Mountains of evidence. Mountains of testimony from firsthand fact witnesses. Serious legal battles to get what was necessary.

‘This time around, House Democrats skipped all of that and spent just 12 weeks. 

‘More than a year of hearings for Nixon… multiple years of investigation for Clinton… and they’ve impeached President Trump in 12 weeks.

‘So let’s talk about what the House actually produced in those 12 weeks.

‘House Democrats’ rushed and rigged inquiry yielded two articles of impeachment. They are fundamentally unlike any articles that any prior House of Representatives has ever passed.

‘The first article concerns the core events which House Democrats claim are impeachable — the timing of aid to Ukraine.

‘But it does not even purport to allege any actual crime. Instead, they deploy this vague phrase, “abuse of power,” to impugn the president’s actions in a general, indeterminate way.

‘Speaker Pelosi’s House just gave into a temptation that every other House in history had managed to resist: They impeached a president whom they do not even allege has committed an actual crime known to our laws. They impeached simply because they disagree with a presidential act and question the motive behind it.

‘Look at history. The Andrew Johnson impeachment revolved around a clear violation of a criminal statute, albeit an unconstitutional one. Nixon had obstruction of justice — a felony under our laws. Clinton had perjury — also a felony.

‘Now, the Constitution does not say the House can impeach only those presidents who violate a law.

‘But history matters. Precedent matters. And there were important reasons why every previous House of Representatives in American history restrained itself from crossing this Rubicon.

‘The framers of our Constitution very specifically discussed whether the House should be able to impeach presidents just for “maladministration”— in other words, because the House simply thought the president had bad judgment or was doing a bad job.

‘The written records of the founders’ debates show they specifically rejected this. They realized it would create total dysfunction to set the bar for impeachment that low.

‘James Madison himself explained that allowing impeachment on that basis would mean the President serves at the pleasure of the Congress instead of the pleasure of the American people.

‘It would make the President a creature of Congress, not the head of a separate and equal branch. So there were powerful reasons why Congress after Congress for 230 years required presidential impeachments to revolve around clear, recognizable crimes, even though that was not a strict limitation.

‘Powerful reasons why, for 230 years, no House opened the Pandora’s box of subjective, political impeachments.

‘That 230-year tradition died last night.

‘Now, House Democrats have tried to say they had to impeach President Trump on this historically thin and subjective basis because the White House challenged their requests for more witnesses.

‘And that brings us to the second article of impeachment.

‘The House titled this one “obstruction of Congress.” What it really does is impeach the president for asserting presidential privilege.

‘The concept of executive privilege is another two-century-old constitutional tradition. Presidents starting with George Washington have invoked it. Federal courts have repeatedly affirmed it as a legitimate constitutional power.

‘House Democrats requested extraordinary amounts of sensitive information from President Trump’s White House — exactly the kinds of things over which presidents of both parties have asserted privilege in the past. 

‘Predictably, and appropriately, President Trump did not simply roll over. He defended the constitutional authority of his office.

‘It is not a constitutional crisis for a House to want more information than a president wants to give up. It is a routine occurrence. The separation of powers is messy by design.

‘Here’s what should happen next: Either the President and Congress negotiate a settlement, or the third branch of government, the judiciary, addresses the dispute between the other two.

‘The Nixon impeachment featured disagreements over presidential privilege — so they went to the courts. The Clinton impeachment featured disagreements over presidential privilege — so they went to the courts.

‘This takes time. It’s inconvenient. That’s actually the point. Due process is not meant to maximize the convenience of the prosecutor. It is meant to protect the accused.

‘But this time was different. Remember: 14 months of hearings for Richard Nixon… years of investigation for Bill Clinton… but 12 weeks for President Trump.

‘Democrats didn’t have to rush this. But they chose to stick to their political timetable at the expense of pursuing more evidence through proper legal channels.

‘Nobody made Chairman Schiff do this. He chose to.

‘The Tuesday before last, on live television, Adam Schiff explained to the entire country that if House Democrats had let the justice system follow its normal course, they might not have gotten to impeach the president in time for the election!

‘In Nixon, the courts were allowed to do their work. In Clinton, the courts were allowed to do their work. Only these House Democrats decided due process is too much work and they’d rather impeach with no proof.

And, they tried to cover for their own partisan impatience by pretending that the routine occurrence of a president exerting constitutional privilege is itself a second impeachable offense.

The following is something that Adam Schiff literally said in early October. Here’s what he said:

Any action… that forces us to litigate, or have to consider litigation, will be considered further evidence of obstruction of justice.”

‘Here is what the Chairman effectively said, and what one of his committee members restated just this week: If the President asserts his constitutional rights, it’s that much more evidence he is guilty.

‘That kind of bullying is antithetical to American justice.

‘So those are House Democrats’ two articles of impeachment. That’s all their rushed and rigged inquiry could generate:

‘An act that the House does not even allege is criminal; and a nonsensical claim that exercising a legitimate presidential power is somehow an impeachable offense.

‘This is by far the thinnest basis for any House-passed presidential impeachment in American history. The thinnest and the weakest — and nothing else comes even close.

‘And candidly, I don’t think I am the only person around here who realizes this. Even before the House voted yesterday, Democrats had already started to signal uneasiness with its end product. 

‘Before the articles even passed, the Senate Democratic Leader went on television to demand that this body re-do House Democrats’ homework for them. That the Senate should supplement Chairman Schiff’s sloppy work so it is more persuasive than Chairman Schiff himself bothered to make it.

‘Of course, every such demand simply confirms that House Democrats have rushed forward with a case that is much too weak.

‘Back in June, Speaker Pelosi promised the House would, quote, “build an ironclad case.” Never mind that she was basically promising impeachment months before the Ukraine events, but that’s a separate matter.

‘She promised “an ironclad case.”

‘And in March, Speaker Pelosi said this: “Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country.” End quote.

‘By the Speaker’s own standards, she has failed the country. This case is not compelling, not overwhelming, and as a result, not bipartisan. This failure was made clear to everyone earlier this week, when Senator Schumer began searching for ways the Senate could step out of our proper role and try to fix House Democrats’ failures for them.

‘And it was made even more clear last night, when Speaker Pelosi suggested that House Democrats may be too afraid to even transmit their work product to the Senate. 

‘The prosecutors are getting cold feet in front of the entire country and second-guessing whether they even want to go to trial.

‘They said impeachment was so urgent that it could not even wait for due process but now they’re content to sit on their hands. It is comical.

‘Democrats’ own actions concede that their allegations are unproven.

‘But the articles aren’t just unproven. They’re also constitutionally incoherent. Frankly, if either of these articles is blessed by the Senate, we could easily see the impeachment of every future president of either party.

‘Let me say that again: If the Senate blesses this historically low bar, we will invite the impeachment of every future president.

‘The House Democrats’ allegations, as presented, are incompatible with our constitutional order. They are unlike anything that has ever been seen in 230 years of this Republic.

‘House Democrats want to create new rules for this president because they feel uniquely enraged. But long after the partisan fever of this moment has broken, the institutional damage will remain.

‘I’ve described the threat to the presidency. But this also imperils the Senate itself. 

‘The House has created an unfair, unfinished product that looks nothing like any impeachment inquiry in American history. And if the Speaker ever gets her house in order, that mess will be dumped on the Senate’s lap.

‘If the Senate blesses this slapdash impeachment… if we say that from now on, this is enough… then we will invite an endless parade of impeachment trials.

‘Future Houses of either party will feel free to toss up a “jump ball” every time they feel angry. Free to swamp the Senate with trial after trial, no matter how baseless the charges. 

‘We would be giving future Houses of either party unbelievable new power to paralyze the Senate at their whim.

‘More thin arguments. More incomplete evidence. More partisan impeachments.

In fact, this same House of Representatives has already indicated that they themselves may not be done impeaching!

‘The House Judiciary Committee told a federal court this week that it will continue its impeachment investigation even after voting on these articles. And multiple Democratic members have already called publicly for more.

‘If the Senate blesses this, if the nation accepts it, presidential impeachments may cease being once-in-a-generation events and become a constant part of the political background noise. 

‘This extraordinary tool of last resort may become just another part of the arms race of polarization.

‘Real statesmen would have recognized, no matter their view of this president, that trying to remove him on this thin and partisan basis could unsettle the foundations of our Republic.

‘Real statesmen would have recognized, no matter how much partisan animosity might be coursing through their veins, that cheapening the impeachment process was not the answer.

‘Historians will regard this as a great irony of this era: That so many who professed such concern for our norms and traditions themselves proved willing to trample our constitutional order to get their way.

‘It is long past time for Washington D.C. to get a little perspective.

‘President Trump is not the first president with a populist streak…Not the first to make entrenched elites uncomfortable. He’s certainly not the first president to speak bluntly… to mistrust the administrative state… or to rankle unelected bureaucrats.

‘And Heaven knows he is not our first president to assert the constitutional privileges of his office rather than roll over when Congress demands unlimited sensitive information.

‘None of these things is unprecedented.

‘I’ll tell you what would be unprecedented. It will be an unprecedented constitutional crisis if the Senate hands the House of Representatives a new, partisan “vote of no confidence” that the founders intentionally withheld, destroying the independence of the presidency.

‘It will be unprecedented if we agree that any future House that dislikes any future president can rush through an unfair inquiry, skip the legal system, and paralyze the Senate with a trial. The House could do that at will under this precedent.

‘It will be unprecedented if the Senate says secondhand and thirdhand testimony from unelected civil servants is enough to overturn the people’s vote.

‘It will be an unprecedented constitutional crisis if the Senate agrees to set the bar this low — forever.

‘It is clear what this moment requires. It requires the Senate to fulfill our founding purpose.

‘The framers built the Senate to provide stability. To take the long view for our Republic. To safeguard institutions from the momentary hysteria that sometimes consumes our politics. To keep partisan passions from boiling over.

‘The Senate exists for moments like this.

‘That’s why this body has the ultimate say in impeachments.

‘The framers knew the House would be too vulnerable to transient passions and violent factionalism. They needed a body that could consider legal questions about what has been proven and political questions about what the common good of our nation requires.

‘Hamilton said explicitly in Federalist 65 that impeachment involves not just legal questions, but inherently political judgments about what outcome best serves the nation.

‘The House can’t do both. The courts can’t do both.

‘This is as grave an assignment as the Constitution gives to any branch of government, and the framers knew only the Senate could handle it. Well, the moment the framers feared has arrived.

‘A political faction in the lower chamber have succumbed to partisan rage. They have fulfilled Hamilton’s prophesy that impeachment will, quote, “connect itself with the pre-existing factions… enlist all their animosities… [and] there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.” End quote.

‘That is what happened in the House last night. The vote did not reflect what had been proven. It only reflects how they feel about the President.

‘The Senate must put this right. We must rise to the occasion.

‘There is only one outcome that is suited to the paucity of evidence, the failed inquiry, the slapdash case.

‘Only one outcome suited to the fact that the accusations themselves are constitutionally incoherent.

‘Only one outcome that will preserve core precedents rather than smash them into bits in a fit of partisan rage because one party still cannot accept the American people’s choice in 2016.

‘It could not be clearer which outcome would serve the stabilizing, institution-preserving, fever-breaking role for which the United States Senate was created… and which outcome would betray it.

‘The Senate’s duty is clear. The Senate’s duty is clear.

‘When the time comes, we must fulfill it.’

““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““`

Senator Schumer responded:

Speaker Pelosi responded:

McCarthy responded:

Soviet American Comrades (Washington Post Cadre) Celebrate Unanimous Denunciation of Nixonist Donald Trump Minus Two Reactionaries and Running Dog Tulsi Gabbard Showing Usual Cowardice (2019, colorized)

The party later issued a correction to unfounded rumours.

Thank you for your attention to this matter as we approach the state holiday season. Please speak and think responsibly.

WP/CIA/KGB

Socialism Dies In Sunlight

Dear KAG!: 20191219 Open Thread

 This Night before Daughn Thursday 20191219 Open Thread is Open – VERY OPEN – a place for everybody to post whatever they feel they would like to tell the White Hats, and the rest of the MAGA / KAG! / KMAG world (KMAG being a bit of both MAGA and KAG! You can say what you want, comment on what other people said, and so on.

Free Speech is practiced here. ENJOY IT. Use it or lose it.

However, we have a new policy. Starting 20191110. Keep it SOMEWHAT civil. We have a new board – actually a new SITE – called The U Tree – where people can take each other to the woodshed without fear of censorship or moderation. NOT HERE. This board will remain a REFUGE for those who need civility, either some or all of the time.

They tried to FORCE fake Orwellian civility on us. In response, we CHOOSE true civility to defend our precious FREEDOM from THEM. Our rules began with the civility of the Old Treehouse, later to become the Wolverinian Empire, and one might say that we have RESTORED THE OLD REPUBLIC – the early high-interaction model of the Treehouse – except of course that Q discussion is not only allowed but encouraged, and speech is considerably freer in other ways. Please feel free to argue and disagree with the board owner, as nicely as possible.

Please also consider the Important Guidelines, outlined here in the January 1st open thread. Let’s not give the odious Internet Censors a reason to shut down this precious haven.

SPEAK THE FIVE WORDS BOLDLY TO OUR PRESIDENT! “I AM PRAYING FOR YOU!“

Also remember Wheatie’s Rules: •1.No food fights. •2.No running with scissors. •3.If you bring snacks, bring enough for everyone .


Yesterday sure was a day to remember wasn’t it? Q drops, ScamImpeachment and Horowitz hearings.

Some days the sh*t comes down so hot and heavy it’s hard to take in all in and make sense of it all!



I’m not worried though because we have the Best President Ever.



However he may be getting irritated with The Swamp


As I sit here early afternoon 12/18 getting this post put together I confess I’m getting old and I need my sleep. So tonight 12/18 another Rally courtesy of POTUS Trump and I try not to ever miss a Rally and AG Barr @ 7:00 pm!

It will probably be 9:00 or so and this old guy will start nodding off but, The QTree NightShift will be here so MAGA ON.


20191218: Horowitz Testimony to Homeland Sec Committee

Heads up, we have another Horowitz Committee Hearing in the Senate to Ron Johnson’s Committee. This hearing might be far more interesting than ShamPeachment in the House.

Note: This testimony comes after Rosemary Collyer’s strong rebuke of FISA Process AND after Devin Nunes has called for a complete shutdown of FISC Court in the interim.

Join us on CSPAN 3 for the hearing. We’re sure to get a few tasty morsels to drop today.

The Terrible Triggering and Trolling Power of Trumpy Bear

‘Trumpy Bear’: Is It Real or a Spoof?

LINK: https://pjmedia.com/trending/trumpy-bear-real-spoof/

OK. I have to admit that I LAUGHED and LAUGHED when I first saw an ad for this on OAN.

But YES. It is REAL.

Here is the website: https://gettrumpybear.com/

Look closely – the SCAM is that it’s TWO payments of $19.95 – so it’s a 40-buck plushy.

And then there is THIS. The YouTube. OMG. I’m dying of laughter!

But if you’re wondering if it’s REALLY worth it….


“There’s a Trump-inspired Trumpy bear and it’s just as terrifying as its inspiration”

https://metro.co.uk/2018/11/20/theres-a-trump-inspired-trumpy-bear-and-its-just-as-terrifying-as-its-inspiration-8158632/


Trust me. In America, terrifying the British NEVER goes out of style!

And YES. My WIFE wants one!

OH, THE PAIN!!!

W

https://youtu.be/kTA98N1dwwQ

FAST COMPANY: https://www.fastcompany.com/90266287/why-the-advertising-legend-of-trumpy-bear-will-never-die

20191218: Merry Christmas MAGA Rally in Battle Creek, MI

Did someone say Christmas Rally? You mean we can hang garland and lights on my Red MAGA Hat? Never been to a MAGA Merry Christmas Rally, have you? Who wants to go to Michigan tomorrow? I’m ready! Where exactly is Battle Creek?

Battle Creek is about halfway between Chicago and Detroit, within striking distance of Lansing, Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo, and Ann Arbor + Ohio and Indiana

Merry Christmas Rally starts at 7:00PM Eastern Time and it’s definitely a MERRY Christmas Rally at the Kellogg Arena.

You know WHY the rally is at the Kellogg Arena???? Because Battle Creek, Michigan is known all over the WORLD as CEREAL CITY, USA. Home to Kellogg’s and Tony the Tiger.

Since we’re traveling the country, virtually, with the President, we need to know a little bit more about Michigan before we get there. It’s okay, I’ll read to you while you drive….

The state of Michigan is composed of two peninsulas. One looks like a mitten, and the other, like a seagull (people who live on the upper peninsula(U.P.) are called “Yoopers”). The two are divided by the Straits of Mackinac, about 5 miles across. The state, with both land masses, is surrounded by 4/5 fresh water Great Lakes and 64,980 inland lakes and ponds. Natural freshwater is found in abundance in MI. In fact, every one of the 10 million people (10th largest by population) who live in MI are no more than 6 miles from a fresh water natural resource.

Michigan is home to The Detroit Lions, Octopus on the Ice for the RedWings, America’s Auto Industry, and Motown music. Michigan changed the world and exported American Culture. From Cairo to Bangladesh, there was once a time when we all sang the same songs…… and many were written by Smokey Robinson. And the pinnacle of American freedom and capitalism was an American muscle car…… still is.

No one can compete with Detroit!

State of Michigan is 456 miles x 386 miles, median income is $54,909 (ranked 34th)- but that stat is from Dec of ’16, before President Trump’s economy. Michigan was settled/controlled by Indians, the French, Brits, and finally became a state in 1837 (26th one). The Indians were a mix of Algonquian peoples, which include the Anishinaabe groups of Ojibwe (referred to as “Chippewa” in the United States), Ottawa, and the Bodéwadmi. The three nations co-existed peacefully as part of a loose confederation called the Council of Three Fires………. which is WHY we find, close to Battle Creek, a FireKeepers Casino on Indian Land.

I cannot tell you how beautiful the town of Battle Creek Michigan is at Christmas. It’s perfect and could have been the live set from the Movie “A Christmas Story”. Stay a few days and do some last minute shopping.

Here’s the pic from 1939, Battle Creek Christmas, very little has changed.
It’s Christmas Magic in Battle Creek.
There’s a big balloon festival.
And the old Train Depot is all lit up for the season.
Storefronts are decorated with special Christmas toys.

“Battle Creek” is kind of an unusual name, right? The city got its name from a skirmish that occurred between a government survey party and two Native Americans during the winter of 1823/24. The altercation led settlers to name a nearby waterway the “Battle Creek River,” which itself inspired the naming of Battle Creek. With all the lakes and ponds in Michigan, the local settlers needed bridges.

Joshua’s Crossing, all dressed up for Christmas. Throughout the region every vista is a photographer’s dream.
Town locals decorate the bridges.
The whole state looks like a Christmas Card.

Ohhhh, and did I forget to mention….. Ford Motor Company just announced a 1.5 BILLION dollar investment in Detroit plants. We’re building trucks and SUVs in Detroit again! Another 3,000 Auto Workers. Michigan is getting their groove back and the proof is in the numbers. In 2016, the GDP of Michigan was 460 billion, but by the end of 2018, they hit 527 BILLION (according to St Louis Fed). The very definition of an economic boom – thanks to this guy! Passage of USMCA will only make it better for those in Michigan! MOAR car parts Made in the USA.

OUR President is so cool, he looks like a Secret Service Agent.

The entire political leadership of Michigan is Dem, their Gov, the Lt. Gov, their Senators, 7 Congressmen (6 are Repubs and 1 Indie). MI was always a stronghold for Dems because of Union voting. BUT, times are changing, union rank and file don’t trust leadership and Donald Trump is the one delivering for them. Be on the lookout for this guy….. John James. He’s a Repub, West Point grad, Army Ranger, Businessman, and Conservative. No doubt, he will be at the rally tomorrow.

And the very BEST part about Michigan??? You know, Michigan has a few nicknames, “The Great Lakes State” is one, but the official nickname is THE WOLVERINE STATE.

I mean, how can we NOT love a state filled with Wolverines!

Suddenly, I’m in love with Michigan! So, let’s all hop into the Caddie and take a road trip….. we’re going to Battle Creek for a MAGA Merry Christmas Rally! Plug in some Motown and we’ll be there in no time. Thank you, President Trump. Godspeed.

Perfect for a road trip to Battle Creek!

This rally will be one for the ages.

PS. I’ll post the live links in the morning as soon as the outlets release them.

Dear KAG: 20191218 Open Thread

And here we are at the LET IT SNOW version of the Wednesday Open Thread. Yes, several of us are under the tyranny of the white stuff. We would thank our friends in more tropical climes to not rub it in.

And now for something completely politically incorrect.

Okay, so here’s the deal. This is the open thread. This is where we all come to get the news that other Q tree inhabitants think is worth knowing and sharing. Please, post links to any “news” stories quoted, and ask for help if you are stumped as to how to do that. We’re a friendly lot. Someone will be with you shortly, and there is no reason to have to press one for English.

Free speech, and the open exchange and hashing out of ideas is not only allowed, but encouraged. If we all don’t use it, we’re going to lose it. There are, however, limits to civility, and those limits are strictly observed here. We are all on the same team. No personal threats, baiting, name calling and other behavior your mother and grandmother told you not to do while calling you by your full name is allowed. This sort of battle, on the other hand, is perfectly acceptable.

https://youtu.be/cM8DcCoZulw

There is absolutely no reason for infighting to result in burning down the tree, house up in the branches and all. Yes, it can be rough to temper speech. However, those who would like to slog it out from the comfort of the seat behind your keyboard, Wolf has provided a venue known as the UTree. Please, take it there.

And now for some house keeping:

There are a few rules here in the branches of the Q Tree. Our host, Wolfm00n, outlined them in a post on New Years Day. Please, review these rules from time to time, maybe while waiting in line with the kids to see Santa. After all, the line does go all the way to Terre Haute.

Fellow tree dweller Wheatie gave us some good reminders on the basics of civility in political discourse:

  1. No food fights.
  2. No running with scissors.
  3. If you bring snacks, bring enough for everyone.

Steve suggests – to be accurate – no shooting at the nuclear weapons, but to be safe about it, don’t event point firearms toward them. I, Deplorable Patriot, bossy chick that I am, request no teasing the animals, pets and wildlife alike. FG&C asks that you wash your hands and take some vitamin C. Daughn suggests you whip the sugar with the shortning (butter) before adding the flour.

Teasing and trolling the lefties and their bastions, on the other hand is a moral imperative.

__________________________________________________

In the eternal fight against the forces of evil and darkness, unceasing prayer is always needed.

And from today’s Lectionary, and the Gospel According to St. Matthew.

This is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about.
When his mother Mary was betrothed to Joseph,
but before they lived together,
she was found with child through the Holy Spirit.
Joseph her husband, since he was a righteous man,
yet unwilling to expose her to shame,
decided to divorce her quietly.
Such was his intention when, behold,
the angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said,
“Joseph, son of David,
do not be afraid to take Mary your wife into your home.
For it is through the Holy Spirit
that this child has been conceived in her.
She will bear a son and you are to name him Jesus,
because he will save his people from their sins.”
All this took place to fulfill
what the Lord had said through the prophet:

Behold, the virgin shall be with child and bear a son,
and they shall name him Emmanuel,

which means “God is with us.”
When Joseph awoke,
he did as the angel of the Lord had commanded him
and took his wife into his home.
He had no relations with her until she bore a son,
and he named him Jesus.

As always, prayers for the fight against that which seeks to enslave us are welcome.

And now, on to the day’s news…..

Dear KMAG: 20191217 Open Topic

This DELIGHTFUL DECEMBER [1217] “TRUSTY PLAN” Q’PER TUESDAY open thread is VERY OPEN – a place for everybody to post whatever they feel they would like to tell the White Hats, and the rest of the MAGA / KAG! / KMAG world (KMAG being a bit of both MAGA and KAG!).


TRUST THE PLAN

You can say what you want, comment on what other people said, and so on.

Free Speech is practiced here. ENJOY IT. Use it or lose it.


However, we have a new policy. Starting 20191110. Keep it SOMEWHAT civil.

We have a new board – actually a new SITE – called The U Tree – where people can take each other to the woodshed without fear of censorship or moderation. NOT HERE.

This board will remain a REFUGE for those who need civility, either some or all of the time.


Our rules began with the civility of the Old Treehouse, later to become the Wolverinian Empire, and one might say that we have RESTORED THE OLD REPUBLIC – the early high-interaction model of the Treehouse – except of course that Q discussion is not only allowed but encouraged, and speech is considerably freer in other ways. Please feel free to argue and disagree with the board owner, as nicely as possible.

Please also consider the Important Guidelines, outlined here in the January 1st open thread. Let’s not give the odious Internet Censors a reason to shut down this precious haven.


SPEAK THE FIVE WORDS BOLDLY TO OUR PRESIDENT!

I AM PRAYING FOR YOU!


AND WHAT TIME IS IT?

TIME TO….

DRAIN THE SWAMP

Our movement

Is about replacing

A failed

And CORRUPT

Political establishment

With a new government controlled

By you, the American People.

Candidate Donald J. Trump

Also remember Wheatie’s Rules:

  1. No food fights.
  2. No running with scissors.
  3. If you bring snacks, bring enough for everyone.

Friends,

It is rare for me to quote from that notorious American socialist, FDR, and yet there are times when I simply have to do it.

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-7Z9BQ8Ftb9o/VSqXv_rL-KI/AAAAAAAAIXs/EuVhb-tOGK0/s1600/fdr%2Bmemorial.jpg

If you’ve ever visited the FDR Memorial, and you’ve ever had any kind of military or other training in climbing of walls, obstacles, or even mountains – or if you are just a kid at heart and love to climb on things – FEARLESSLY – then you probably thought to yourself “I wonder if I could climb up this monument.”

Well, THINK BIGGER.

Being part of MAGA is going to be an ADVENTURE.

It helps to be BRAVE, but that doesn’t mean it won’t ever be SCARY. BRAVERY is just TALKING BACK TO FEAR.

Now – I have to tell you – FEAR is a tool of our enemies, and they will infect us with it in all sorts of ways, if they can.

These people may be our friends and buddies. You may even be tempted to agree with some of the things they are saying. That’s OK. That is not a problem – AT ALL.

You may also be tempted to disagree with them. That is OK, too, but let me suggest that you do so kindly, and without fear.

In the protection of the Almighty we are afraid of no Truth. Stronger still in Him, we fear no lie. And if it be possible, by the grace of God, then let us not even fear fear itself.



So as you go forth, being part of the “trusty plan” group, I counsel you to be like the PATRIOTS of 1775 and 1776. Bring PEACE, GOOD CHEER, and HOPE IN FREEDOM.

Sow the seeds of TRUST.

When you have doubts, PRAY. Pray for TRUTH, TRUST, and DISCERNMENT.

With the powerful tools of FREEDOM of thought, speech, and religion, protected by the First Amendment that WE PROTECT – ultimately protected by the Second Amendment that WE PROTECT – we shall HAVE NO FEARS.

We shall WIN THIS BATTLE on the SAME PRINCIPLES as our FOREFATHERS and on the same HOPES and DREAMS as the FOUNDERS AND PRESERVERS OF THIS NATION.

W

Climate Change and High School Politics

It’s been said, “Everything I ever needed to know, I learned in high school.” Well, maybe not everything, but it is surprising how much we learn about social interaction as teenagers, and it is disturbing how much the rest of our lives are based on lessons learned in high school. Let’s see what you all think.

The guys, hanging out.

Yesterday morning, GrandmaInTexas posted an article about the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Madrid. Officially, it’s the 2019 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, known as COP25. The problems of group dynamics in Madrid are no different than when we were all in high school. It’s probably why they like Greta so much.

The commies have run out of OPM. 😄 The article is just hilarious. The lies about being able to affect temperatures are epic. Time magazine. Ahhahahahaha!!
https://time.com/5750532/u-n-climate-talks-compromise-madrid/?

GrandmaInTexas, December 16, 2019

For the past two weeks, representatives from almost 200 countries have been meeting in Madrid to solve the problem of Climate Change. Contrary to US policy, Nancy Pelosi and an entire US Delegation made the trip to Madrid, addressed the member nations, and Pelosi pronounced, “We are with you.”, even though we’re not. Here’s a list of those who went: https://www.speaker.gov/newsroom/113019

  • Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)
  • Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) 
  • Chairman Frank Pallone (D-NJ), Committee on Energy and Commerce
  • Chairwoman Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX), Committee on Science, Space, Technology
  • Chairman Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ), Committee on Natural Resources                 
  • Chairwoman Kathy Castor (D-FL), Select Committee on the Climate Crisis
  • Congresswoman Betty McCollum (D-MN)   
  • Congresswoman Suzanne Bonamici (D-OR)  
  • Congresswoman Julia Brownley (D-CA)  
  • Congressman Jared Huffman (D-CA)       
  • Congressman Scott Peters (D-CA)            
  • Congresswoman Debbie Dingell (D-MI) 
  • Congressman Mike Levin (D-CA)    
  • Congressman Sean Casten (D-IL)   
  • Congressman Joe Neguse (D-CO) 
Cheerleaders got to go on the special trip to Madrid.

Greta Thuneberg also made an appearance to much fanfare.

The tattletale kid that no one likes. The kid who really does want to turn the lights out at 10:00pm when we’re on a team trip.

We’ve been watching the news coming out of the Madrid Conference.
It’s not about climate at all.
It’s a money grab, pure and simple, with no decisive leaders. They reached no conclusion, except to spend another two weeks of vacation, in Glasgow next year, for another conference. After two weeks……. nothing. It’s been almost five years since the Paris Accords, yet still…….. nothing.

And then it hit me. My high school classmates were more effective when it comes to decision making. Committees….. yikes!
We learned all about committees in high school, remember? Our school had almost 5,000 students, the size of most small colleges. Strangely, our high school problem was/is remarkably similar to the Madrid Conference.
Watch ……

As a sophomore, somehow I ended up on a committee to decide whether or not we needed a school uniform. Our group was to meet once a week, for a school year, develop a report with recommendations to be adopted the subsequent school year. Similarities to Madrid = Handpicked people, fairly well respected within their own sphere of influence, either ignorant and well intentioned or malicious and aware of the real motives of superior power …… sounds like Madrid Climate Conference. The players are the same since high school.

We were a bunch of young kids who didn’t know any better, right? Chances are, as teenagers, we were well intentioned. Let’s assume COP25 attendees were mostly well intentioned.
At our first meeting, we vigorously discussed the topic in great detail = high energy in the beginning, a lot like Madrid.
Discussions were pretty hot, and our meeting went far longer than we anticipated = Madrid went two days beyond schedule.
Yet, we took several votes, compromised, and resolved the problem = no uniform but a guideline of what was/was not acceptable altering past handbook = UNLIKE like Madrid, we reached conclusions.
I was tasked to write up the results and send to school admins.
Sure, no problem.
Within a few days, I was done and recommendations submitted.

Few days later, I was notified to appear to School Administration office to “report” for a panel discussion later that month.
In the days leading up to the meeting, several other students approached me and warned me to “to a good job”. I got the impression it was more important than I originally thought.
But I was a dumb young kid, right? I wore a suit, reviewed mine and others notes, wrote down our main points in short outline and thought I was ready. How bad could it be?

Five Administrators on the panel and I was questioned like Joan of Arc with Administrators who were giddy, building a fire for my imminent demise. Similarities to Madrid = I was the USA who refused to pay billions/trillions to other countries for an ill-defined definition and promotion of climate change, let alone a financial marketplace like a stock exchange trading carbon credits.

First revelation: It became apparent the panel didn’t like the idea that students came to conclusions so quickly. Well, that was a surprise. We were supposed to take A WHOLE YEAR to decide. They expected us to meet once a week for an hour…. all year long. Does this sound like Brexit to you? Or Climate Change? We don’t like your answer, so we think you need to study it more until you agree with our desired outcome. We don’t like efficiency, we need another vacation at another European capital? Scary similarities.

In reality, our classmates first meeting went almost five hours long at a local pizza joint. We stayed, ate, and drank beer (we could back then) until we figured it out. We were far more effective than those in Madrid. Consensus reached, no pretense. When is the last time it was so easy for the United Nations? When people are left to their own devices, even self-absorbed teenagers don’t like to waste time.

I attempted to counter the panel’s invalid objection as to “proper gestation length” for examination of the problem, discussion, and how fast we could expect a baby – a set of solutions. A “time” objection was false on merit but it’s almost impossible for a teen to tell an adult they’re incorrect. I assured the panel our conclusions would be no different in the spring as they were at the time, and that we were saving time. Be proud of us, please, the problem was solved! Similarities to Madrid = there are valid objections to spending billions/trillions of dollars on models which have previously been proven false, “estimates” of success to any human attempt to change results, undermining our economies, especially with dubious commitment from China/India.

In high school, a problem arose which was clearly defined to us at the time. We were tasked to solve the problem, and we stayed until we reached agreement — like business people do in a contract negotiation. Paraphrasing, “What would be the benefit of a delay once an agreement has been reached? We have resolved the issue.”

Second revelation: The panel was concerned we had not spoken to our classmates, to see “how they feel”.
Well, that wasn’t true. The whole school, particularly the girls, knew the dress code was up for grabs and we were all talking about it. I had, in fact, taken an unofficial poll of my class before I went into the first meeting. I produced my notes to the panel. Standard objections and answers, part of any panel discussion, right? I countered all objections but the panel remained unsatisfied. Why? “Feel”?

“How they feel”……. something about this objection did not ring true, as if the panel had knowledge I did not have. They were condescending towards me, even dismissive and mean. Yet, their assumptions were imaginary, not valid….. and I knew it…. and they were trying to tell me I was wrong….. and I wasn’t wrong. Scary similarities, but the first time I recall this tactic being used. Then, working off false assumptions, the panel made it worse….. They presumed to know how students would feel in the future…… by some arbitrary decision the panel made today, “Everyone will FEEL so much better when they don’t have to compete.” What????? I took a job so I could afford to go to proms. Similarities to Madrid = Working from a series of questionable projections, COP25 presumes an economic solution for a desired outcome. If this doesn’t sound familiar to today’s political battles, we’re not paying attention.

I wasn’t feeling like they felt. Nope, not at all.

As a 15yr old, I was fairly confused. What was happening? We were the elected student reps and made decisions based on what we thought other classmates would want. We had no malintent and ignorant of the fact that anyone would presume malintent. One panel member rolled her eyes and implied she did not believe me. Similarities = It’s the exact same thing which happens on Twitter today.

At the time, I was shocked. Why would I lie? Why would I want an overly restrictive dress code if I must follow the same rules? Was the panel implying SOME people didn’t have to follow the rules? How could that happen? Gee whiz, everyone not following the same rules would not be fair, right? How could THAT happen?

Third revelation: The panel wanted uniforms. I learned our decision would likely be replicated across district and state – our’s was the biggest high school in the state and being used as an example. Suddenly, it wasn’t only “my people”, it was potentially the whole state full of teenagers just like me. I was on my feet by that point but precise, cold, and calm. If I lashed out, at adults with an ulterior motive, I would be thrown out….. a defacto loss. The idea that students had any choice was an illusion. Similarities to Madrid = Sound familiar?

01.02.2012 COPY PHOTO – Camilla Highfield (centre). Photo Credit – Michael Bradley.

We were being railroaded, but if I was mad, we would lose our independence to dress as we wanted. “Saddle Oxfords in 1978? You’ve got to be kidding me!”, I thought.
Why ask for our input if they did not want it? (Voting) And not only that, you wanted us to meet for a year, wasting MORE time, on the false premise that we had input into the decision? (We made up our mind) When you’ve already reached a decision? (The elites had decided) Therefore, asking for our input was false, fake, a lie? (Yes) Similarities to Madrid = Why does this discussion sound so much like a preordained outcome for the USA and EU before Brexit and the election of President Trump?

Again, I was the stupid kid, right? Yet, something strange happened along the way, everything turned on a single moment. I began to question the panel, standing, walking, addressing members individually. Please tell me, Why do YOU think we need uniforms? What would be the benefits? What is the potential for downside? What would be the cost? What about cost for large families? What about school spirit Fridays where students wear team/club t-shirts and jackets and what would be the financial loss to all teams/clubs? Doesn’t a “one size fits all” dress code inhibit personal expression? And if we’re really concerned with how students FEEL, then how can we possibly be so disrespectful to presume all students FEEL the same way? I was low, monotone, open palmed without realizing it.

The panel stuttered and stammered, unprepared for questions. Momentum shifted. I pressed and closed in. As seconds and minutes ticked by, I spoke with greater conviction. My voice became deeper, coming from my gut, more powerful, like 5,000 voices. I could feel that power, and trust me…. It wasn’t coming from me…….It came from someplace else…… Similarities to those in Madrid/Brexit/USA Congress = Ruling class is NOT prepared for challenges to authority when they make bad decisions.

We have far more power than we think we do.

And finally, innocently, I lobbed a bomb, “Who among you would benefit financially from a uniform shop?” It was an innocuous question, an afterthought. I threw it out like a fisherman would cast a net, and it hung in the air………… no answer. Silence. Yet,…. I caught something, unknown to me. At the time, I was naive. I had no belief anyone on the panel had bad motives. I was far too young and dumb. Looking back, it was precisely when our panel abruptly ended the meeting. Decision was tabled. There was no more discussion/announcements from the administration. Similarities to Madrid = The media stopped covering it.

The Administration adopted our small changes for the next year, no big deal, practically a rubber stamp. No uniforms for at least another 15yrs. Similarities = At all times, hide the money trail to who benefits. I didn’t expect to get everything we wanted. Cuz, from the Rolling Stones and President Trump, we know, “You Can’t Always Get What You Want”. Right? I thought, maybe, “Two Outta Three Ain’t Bad”……….

But in the late 70’s, we were “doubly blessed”.

Lessons learned = Sometimes, it’s not the calculus and chemistry we remember from high school. Sometimes, it’s more.

  • Stated objections are often intentional distractions.
  • Define the REAL problem and clear definitions, otherwise, time is wasted.
  • People who are free to govern themselves, and who are forced to live by the same set of rules, make good decisions…… and quickly resolve problems.
  • Follow the money for hidden motives.
  • Committees are not always bad………
  • The people have more common sense than rulers are willing to admit.
He looks just like Dr. Carvajal, my physics teacher.

A Higher Loyalty: Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation, a.k.a. HSBC

Wherein we postulate that the real driver of James Comey and Spygate comes straight out of CHINA-PWNED BANKSTERISM – that the Clinton relationship to China may actually be “handled” via HSBC, and that the fact that the entire international cast of Spygate is nearly perfectly matched by the amoeba-like shadow of HSBC is no accident.

So WHO or WHAT is HSBC?

AND I QUOTE:

HSBC Holdings plc is a British[6] multinational investment bank and financial services holding company. It was the 7th largest bank in the world by 2018, and the largest in Europe, with total assets of US$2.558 trillion (as of December 2018). HSBC traces its origin to a hong in Hong Kong, and its present form was established in London by the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation to act as a new group holding company in 1991.[7][8] The origins of the bank lie mainly in Hong Kong and to a lesser extent in Shanghai, where branches were first opened in 1865.[1] The HSBC name is derived from the initials of the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation.[9] The company was first formally incorporated in 1866.[10]

HSBC has around 3,900 offices in 65 countries and territories across Africa, Asia, Oceania, Europe, North America, and South America, and around 38 million customers.[11] As of 2014, it was the world’s sixth-largest public company, according to a composite measure by Forbes magazine.[12]

HSBC is organised within four business groups: Commercial Banking, Global Banking and Markets (investment banking), Retail Banking and Wealth Management, and Global Private Banking.[13][14]

HSBC has a dual[15] primary listing on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange and London Stock Exchange and is a constituent of the Hang Seng Index and the FTSE 100 Index. As of 6 July 2012, it had a market capitalisation of £102.7 billion, the second-largest company listed on the London Stock Exchange, after Royal Dutch Shell.[16] It has secondary listings on the New York Stock Exchange, Euronext Paris, and the Bermuda Stock Exchange.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HSBC

I had NO IDEA that this company that hired James Comey was CHINA-RELATED until I began writing this post. The reason is that I never see Hong Kong, Shanghai, or China ever mentioned when HSBC is being talked about. ENGLAND and EUROPE are usually hinted at. Thus, to me, HSBC was always just some “European” bank. But yet – well – Hong Kong and China – possibly being almost the same thing to the ChiComs per their propaganda – are IMPORTANT at the very least in HSBC.

My revelation about Comey and his relationship to HSBC being CRITICAL in understanding Spygate stems from my recent time in Paris, mentioned earlier in my post about the cab driver there.

When I was in Paris, I saw very EXPENSIVE signs and ads for HSBC almost EVERYWHERE – so much so, that I assumed it must have been some kind of FRENCH BANK. Well, not quite. But nevertheless, the main impact of all these signs was to IMPRESS ME with the POWER of HSBC.

How could Comey even THINK of resisting that stuff?



I mean, seriously – how do you TALK BACK to this shit when you’re just a guy like me on the internet who CAN – [ barring some minor attempted outsourced GUNPLAY, “vide infra” ] – much less somebody who actually WORKED FOR IT?

HSBC – whose fortunes are largely controlled by the CHICOMS – wants to take away your GUNS? Hey – it might actually HAPPEN. And if a few Americans are killed in the process…… Well….. Not thinking these people really CARE all that much.

Suddenly, the idea that Comey had WORKED for HSBC, began to make me think that maybe they were still INFLUENCING HIM – even if only in his LATENT WORLDVIEW.

And then something CLICKED. HSBC was even MORE connected to one of my weird little GUN SET-UPS – which I have assumed were FBI-related – than even “Epstein-related corporate entities”.

“Mmmmmmmm-hmmmmmmm.”

Suddenly, things began making sense. What if the FBI has been TAINTED by HSBC after Comey’s time there? What if it’s not “THING 1” but rather “THING 2” that has been mucking with the FBI from the inside?

CHYYYNNAA – and maybe LONDON, too.

Perhaps not right NOW, with Director Wray in charge, because Wray has been very aggressive in taking on the China threats which Mueller and Comey tended to ignore. But IF the HSBC taint in the FBI was deep and subtle, it would explain a lot.

And then there is this:

HSBC Money-Laundering Case Haunts Mueller’s Prosecution of Manafort

Why Mueller, Comey, Loretta Lynch and Eric Holder let HSBC walk on criminal money-laundering crimes in exchange for $1.9 billion fine

https://www.newswars.com/hsbc-money-laundering-case-haunts-muellers-prosecution-of-manafort/

LINK: https://www.newswars.com/hsbc-money-laundering-case-haunts-muellers-prosecution-of-manafort/

Now – before you think this is “all there is” (bad enough that it is), allow me to suggest that you simply so a web search on “Comey” and “HSBC”. You will be shocked at not only how much scandalous material arises – you will see that “Clinton Foundation” features in almost all of it.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=comey+hsbc&ia=web

Just click that link and PICK OUT one or two articles.

There is NO WAY that either James Comey or Andrew McCabe should have been allowed to TOUCH the Clinton email case. “Recusal” is not strong enough. They should not have been allowed to even TALK about it.

Bill Priestap should have had the final say on it. MAYBE – and “maybe” is probably more honest – given that Priestap’s wife is some kind of connected financial and Israeli intelligence private investigation MEGA SECURITY RISK. (Sorry – I don’t want to sort through all her employers, REAL AND COVER, right now….)

You know who should have been put in charge of the FBI investigation? Who should have “negotiated” with Loretta Lynch?

A RANDOM “rank and file” FBI agent, whose name was drawn from a HAT on live TV.


Be that as it all may, I find it very odd that an “English” (COUGH, COUGH) global bank that is rooted in CHINA and which does mega business with the CLINTON FOUNDATION and the CLINTONS was the employer of JAMES COMEY for many years. A bank which is geographically and culturally connected to nearly EVERY player in SpyGate.

So – what do you all think?

Is #SpyGate really a “derivative” of #HSBCgate?

Maybe the “banksters” are FAR CLOSER than we have thought.

W