President Trump rallied last night in Louisiana to support a challenge to incumbent Democrat Governor John Bel Edwards. The goal is to hold JBE under 50% and force a run-off against a republican challenger.
The national Democrats have made this race a referendum on the Trump impeachment agenda, saying if JBE can win in Louisiana then it proves Trump is weak enough to be impeached.
Mr. Edwards has tried not to make this a national referendum.
If President Trump and the Republican challengers, U.S. Representative Ralph Abraham and businessman Eddie Rispone, can hold Edwards to less than 50%, then one of them will challenge Governor Edwards in a state-wide runoff for the governor position.
  UPDATE: Mission Accomplished.  John Bel Edwards has been held under 50% and will face Republican businessman “Eddie” Rispone in a run-off to decide the governors race.

(more…)

White House senior policy adviser Stephen Miller appears with Jesse Watters to discuss the ongoing impeachment efforts and the political agenda of those within the administrative state who are opposed to President Trump.

(more…)

Jonathan Turley asks a question today about why the media will not allow any discussion of Joe Biden’s obviously corrupt Achilles heel to be discussed.
Within his article Turley cites examples of CNN, NBC, MSNBC and a host of other mainstream news outlets that will not allow any discussion of Joe Biden’s transparently visible weakness.  He ponders ‘why’?

[…] When Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-N.Y.) raised the issue on CNN, host Erin Burnett cut him off: “There is no evidence of Joe Biden doing anything wrong, and this is something that has been looked into, and I think — I want to make a point here — I think what we need to talk about right now is what did the president right now do or not do.” Other CNN hosts have repeated the line of “no evidence of wrongdoing” like a virtual incantation.
[…] For news shows on MSNBC, CNN and other cable networks, nothing is more disgusting than the mention of what Hunter Biden actually was doing in Ukraine.

(more…)

Here is the video and transcript from the Oval Office press announcement by President Trump and Chinese Vice-Premier Liu He.   USTR Lighthizer and Secretary Mnuchin also provided some insight into “Phase-One” of the U.S-China trade agreement.

[Transcript] – PRESIDENT TRUMP: Well, thank you very much. We’ve had a lot of very big news and some very good news today. But I’d like to hold this for China. There’s nothing bigger than what we’re doing with China. I think it’s important that these are the questions that are asked. And, as you know, we have the Vice Premier of China, one of the most respected men in all of China, and the world, for that matter. And we have great respect for him, a great friendship with him.
(more…)

House Intelligence Committee Rep. Devin Nunes discusses former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch testifying to her friends in congress during the Democrats’ “chaotic circus” of an impeachment inquiry.

(more…)

A report from the Wall Street Journal outlines a request by lawyers for the fake CIA ‘whistleblower’ that ultimately spells doom for the entire phony construct of the impeachment construction by anonymous complaint.

The Wall Street Journal is reporting the anonymous gossipers’ lawyers are now requesting official impeachment testimony by letters not an in-person appearance.  If this is accurate such a request speaks directly to the abject stupidity of the claim:

WASHINGTON—Lawyers for the CIA officer whose whistleblower complaint helped ignite an impeachment inquiry into President Trump have asked Congress whether their client could submit testimony in writing instead of appearing in person, according to people familiar with the matter.
The request reflects concerns about whether the whistleblower could testify to Democrats and Republicans without revealing his identity, and fears that doing so would lead to it being publicly leaked, jeopardizing his personal safety. The intelligence committees haven’t yet responded to the inquiry about potential written testimony, the people said.

(more…)

Two years of litigation, thousands of resistance hours used, millions spent on lawyers, and they don’t even get a T-Shirt.  Oh dear…  too funny.

(New York Times) If investigators are going to get their hands on President Trump’s tax returns, they will have to find them somewhere other than Deutsche Bank.

The German bank has told a federal appeals court that it does not have the president’s personal tax returns, the court said on Thursday. (read more)

Be Best !
(more…)

This makes sense on many levels.  As a member of the Obama National Security Council, the CIA “whistle-blower” would have held a working relationship with Vice-President Biden who was given the primary authority to oversee Ukraine effort within the Obama administration.

(Via Washington Examiner)  The 2020 Democratic candidate with whom the CIA whistleblower had a “professional” tie is Joe Biden, according to intelligence officers and former White House officials.
Lawyers for the whistleblower said he had worked only “in the executive branch.” The Washington Examiner has established that he is a career CIA analyst who was detailed to the National Security Council at the White House and has since left. On Sept. 26, the New York Times reported that he was a CIA officer. On Oct. 4, the newspaper added that he “was detailed to the National Security Council at one point.”

(more…)

The House democrats will keep doing this until someone in the media begins to hit them with hard questions that expose the nonsense.

Today Chairman Adam Schiff (House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence); Chairman Elijah E. Cummings (Committee on White House Oversight; and Chairman Eliot L. Engel (House Committee on Foreign Affairs) continue sending carefully worded letters under the guise of ‘subpoenas’. [Main Link Here]

Again, just like all prior examples, this is not a “subpoena”, it is a letter calling itself a “subpoena” and carries NO legal penalty for non-compliance. A legislative “letter” needs to carry judicial enforcement authority –A PENALTY– in order to be a “subpoena”.
There is no penalty that can be associated with these demands because the Legislative Branch has not established compulsion authority (aka judicial enforcement authority), as they attempt to work through their non-constitutional “impeachment inquiry” process.
It has long been well established by SCOTUS that Congress has lawful (judicial authority) subpoena powers pursuant to its implied responsibility of legislative oversight.  However, that only applies to the powers enumerated in A1§8. Neither foreign policy (Ukraine) nor impeachment have any nexus to A1§8.  The customary Legislative Branch subpoena power is limited to their legislative purpose. 
There is an elevated level of subpoena, made power possible by SCOTUS precedent, that carries inherent penalties for non-compliance, and is specifically allowed for impeachment investigations.  That level of elevated House authority requires a full House authorization vote.
(more…)

If House Speaker Nancy Pelosi didn’t have the media pushing her narrative the impeachment effort would have already failed.    In this interview Judiciary committee ranking member Doug Collins states the un-American inquiry is likely to backfire.

(more…)