Archive for the ‘Always look at the bright side of Trump’ Category

by baldilocks

Remember, President Trump wants the trial in the Senate to happen.

He knows that the Democrats have been after him since he announced his candidacy; they pre-conjured a reason for his impeachment, for Heaven’s sake. Therefore, he is forcing an impeachment at the time of his choosing rather than theirs.

And with formal articles of impeachment set for a House vote – likely this year – things appears to be going according to plan.

By the way, it behooves every American to review the stages of impeachment; who is supposed to do what and when. Since I like to be helpful, here you go.

The House brings charges for impeachment. The Senate holds a trial and votes to convict or acquit. The only way to remove a President, Vice President, or Article 3 judge is through impeachment. Impeachments are not tried by a jury. The rest of the process is left to the rules of Congress.

The process begins with the House. It votes on passing articles of impeachment against a member of the Executive or Judicial branches. If the articles pass, then it is said that the person has been impeached. The vote is a straight up-or-down, majority vote.

After the House votes, the impeachment goes to the Senate. There, members of the House who were advocates for impeachment become the prosecutors in the Senate trial (they are called the House Managers). The accused secures his own counsel. The judge is the Senate itself, though the presiding officer acts as the head judge. In the case of a presidential impeachment, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides; in other cases, the Vice President or President Pro Tem presides.

After all testimony has been heard, the Senate votes. If the Senate votes to convict by more than a two-thirds majority, the person is impeached. The person convicted is removed from office. The Senate may also prevent that person from ever holding another elective office. The Senate may set its own rules for impeachments, and the rules are not subject to judicial review. The Senate has streamlined rules for trial of impeachment for persons holding lower offices. There is no appeal in the case of conviction of impeachment.

Emphasis mine. Won’t that be interesting?

I wish I were surprised at how many people think that when the House votes on formal impeachment articles that the president must be removed from office right then and there, but I’m not. Even some of those who were around when it happened to President Clinton will not bother themselves to understand the process.

Anyway, some of my smart friends speculate that, during the trial, the defense will call only one witness: President Trump himself. If true, it’s very smart in that it will force all eyes – corporeal and digital — to be on the showman …

… the one who is holding all high cards. And the MSM will not be able to ignore it when the president reveals his hand — like they usually do with news they don’t like.

Bonus: it will be Trump versus Nancy Pelosi or Adam Schiff on the cross-examination!

I think Speaker Pelosi understands what’s coming, but she is powerless to stop the freight train. Her dimmer, less experienced charges – not to mention most of the Democrat voting public — want the president’s hide for daring to beat the anointed Hillary Clinton and they are unable to comprehend reason. This is probably why the speaker doesn’t care about being drunk on camera. I’d be frequently sloshed, too, if I were in her position.

This will be the Show of Shows.

People tell me that popcorn is high in carbs. Any suggestions for crunchy low-carb substitutes? I’m going to need them, and you will, too.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng has been blogging since 2003 as baldilocks. Her older blog is here.  She published her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game in 2012.

Follow Juliette on FacebookTwitterMeWePatreon and Social Quodverum.

Hit Da Tech Guy Blog’s Tip Jar !

Or hit Juliette’s!

Can’t anybody play this game?

Casey Stengel

All Democrats had to do was not be crazy

Glenn Reynolds

OK so you’re the Democrats and you have a panel of law professors to start your impeachment panel in the house. You’re looking to create a few sound bites that you can spread to bolster the argument for impeachment legally or at the very least generate a few memorable lines.

What is it that you’re not looking to do? Weaponize the 1st Lady against you by bringing her 13 year old son into your hits on the President.

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

That’s going to play so well to the suburban moms that supposedly are not fans of Trump isn’t it?

That’s the Problem with being a Democrat Professor Living in a Liberal Bubble once you step out of that bubble you find that there is a real world that doesn’t play by your rules.

And frankly a snide apology might bring smiles to the left Twitter reverse iceberg but it’s not going to help their cause.

I want to apologize for what I said earlier about the president’s son. It was wrong of me to do that. I wish the president would apologize, obviously, for the things that he’s done that’s wrong, but I do regret having said that.

Amazing, simply amazing.

[Watching French Calvary deploy in front of them] Goodyear: What about it John Henry?

John Henry Thomas: Looks like we ourselves got mixed up in somebody’s else’s war.

Christian: Yeah Sure does.

Short Grub: What are we going to do now?

John Henry Thomas: Well that’s already been decided.

The Undefeated 1969

Because of the falling polls and the Wile-E-Coyote nature of impeachment there has been some speculation concerning if Democrats will in fact hold an impeachment vote and instead settle for censure.

Don’t count on it.

To be sure they will give it their best shot, in fact I suspect that the purpose of the scholarly witnesses that are going to be called before the judiciary committee’s primary job is not to justify impeachment but to provide the cover necessary for the Democrat votes against it.

Constitutionally Impeachment is a political process, not a judicial one and “high crimes and misdemeanors” are not defined so, it doesn’t matter if the best the Democrats can do is prove that Donald Trump had a nose bleed on the White House carpet, under the rules the Democrats have the right to impeach him for that if they they want.

Nancy Pelosi knows and understands this which is why she tried so hard to avoid open impeachment, particularly after the Mueller goose egg. But once the process had begun she understands that there is no turning back politically. The question is only the best way to do it.

If the Schiff hearings had moved public opinion it would be easy. She might have grabbed a republican vote or two and presented it , with the media’s help, this as a solemn decision to remove a corrupt leader.

But without limited public support, a booming economy, polls showing that minorities that are vital to the Democrat election plans moving toward Trump she is down to playing the best hand she has in the hopes that the GOP in general or the President in particular make a mistake.

Her best hand is to make the best possible case for “censure” and pol test it among Democrat activists. If somehow after the hearings this week poll results tell them they’ve convinced enough democrat fire-eaters that censure is a valid alternative to impeachment (very unlikely) she will go full bore on a cencure vote with every Democrat and perhaps even a stray republican will take place and the left will declare victory.

This would be the 2nd best case for the Democrats and the 2nd least likely which is to say it ain’t gonna happen because while it’s the party’s smartest move it requires woke activists in the party to see reason and reality.

Good luck there.

Of course there is always the remote possibility that the Democrats actually find something that IS impeachable enough to convince the public it’s worth doing or that the White House does something so egregious as to change the polling on impeachment. That’s the best case scenario for the left and the least likely for the reasons.

  1. If the Democrat/Left/Deep State HAD something of this nature, they would have produced it, or leaked it over the last three years
  2. All the evidence so far suggests that the only impeachable acts that have taken place were the previous administrations attempts to corrupt this election, too much deep state digging might uncover this fact.
  3. President Trump has demonstrated that however the left might paint him, he’s much too savvy to make that kind of mistake.

With God all things are of course possible and if this miracle falls into Nancy Pelosi’s lap she will happily accept it but she’s smart enough to not count on it.

Finally there is the chance that enough Democrats will rebel to force her to abandon impeachment although rather than risk a vote that fails. This isn’t going to happen either. It would be the most destructive result for the left and would practically invite primary opponents or at worst 3rd party challengers on an “Impeach Now!” platform. The Damage to the left from such a result would be worse than anything else.

So what WILL happen? Here is the sequence:

  1. Dems make their best case for censure backed up by their report and the scholars who give them cover for it.
  2. Swing state Dems argue strongly for censure saying that this is where the evidence has taken them.
  3. Pelosi after confirming that the fire-eaters will not settle for censure holds the impeachment vote and passes it with 219 Democrats, not a single one from a swing district. Said vote is delayed as long as feasible to discourage primaries from the left on Swing democrats voting “No”.
  4. Democrats do their best to beg borrow or steal enough votes to keep Election 2020 from becoming an electoral disaster and/or hope some event (say Ginsberg’s death) takes place that galvanizes Democrats to the point where they can pull it off.

This is how I see it happening, it’s basically their 2012 Obamacare strategy which was able to work because:

  1. Black votes couldn’t bear the thought of the 1st black president failing to be re-elected
  2. Race trumped faith among Black Christians
  3. The GOP managed to nominate the weakest candidate in their field one that not had pushed for a state version of Obamacare (that I’m still living under) but was unwilling or unable to fight back against anyone but his own base.

Alas for them this time they have a candidate that not only has a strong economy and has proactively reached out to minority Democrat voters but one that is willing to fight back relentlessly.

Bottom line, the Democrats have dealt themselves a bad hand but will play it out the best they can and hope they get lucky. That’s the smartest political move they have left and whatever else you might say about Nancy Pelosi, you can count on her to play the best hand she has, with the media’s help of course.

Update: After Wednesday’s clown car weaponizing the 1st Lady Pelosi has apparently decided to fast track this to minimize the chance of her team providing any more ad material for the GOP in the hearings.

She wants this over and done.

If you want to know why people don’t give “Moderate” Muslims the benefit of the doubt this is why

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

It wasn’t long ago when such a piece would be too fringe even for the Guardian.


I think this tweet is the single best political justification for the media/left’s actions on Trump that I’ve read

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

if you are the party out of power looking to regain it the last thing you want is for the people being “the happiest they’ve ever been” when your foes are in charge.


At the Doug Ross Journal (where I found the above tweet) I saw something that jumped out at me.

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

It turns out this isn’t a new story:

The U.S. can now ship rice to China for the first time ever, signaling a win for President Donald Trump in his efforts to reshape the trade relationship just after talks between the nations broke down Wednesday.
Officials from the nations finalized a protocol to allow for the first-ever American shipments, the U.S. Department of Agriculture said Thursday in a statement. China is the world’s biggest rice consumer, importer and producer.

That’s from 2017 and this is from Feb

While there’s no guarantee, farmers and millers are increasingly optimistic because the Chinese ban has been lifted, a handful of U.S. rice mills have been cleared for export, and China is looking to make the Trump administration happy with commodity purchases.
It was in December that China took a major step toward making that happen, changing its customs regs and officially lifting its ban on U.S. rice. Separately, China has now officially cleared seven of the 34 U.S. rice mills that USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) has asked China to certify under the country’s sanitary and phytosanitary regulations, U.S. industry and government officials tell Agri-Pulse. The remaining mills are still under Chinese consideration, sources say.

Oddly I don’t remember reading it before. Remember Media Bias isn’t just what gets reported, it’s what gets promoted.


Apparently a judge in Michigan believes it’s discrimination when a catholic priest decides not to enable her in a state of mortal sin to commit further mortal sin.

Judge Sara Smolenski, the chief judge of Michigan’s 63rd District Court, received a call from the priest at St. Stephen Catholic Church in Grand Rapids, Michigan, requesting she not attend communion.
“This is not about me against the priest, and it’s not really me against the church,” Smolenski told CNN. “This feels like selective discrimination. Why choose gay people, and why now?”
Smolenski, 62, said that the Rev. Scott Nolan, the priest at St. Stephen for approximately three years, called her on November 23 and told her, “‘It was good to see you in church on Sunday. Because you and Linda are married in the state of Michigan, I’d like you to respect the church and not come to communion.’”

Actually given the Pope we have the idea of a church actually enforcing the rules of the church might actually be newsworthy.


Finally thanks to my injury I was able to watch the entire Patriots game this weekend and see them one guy keeping his balance on an onside kick away from a shot at yet another miracle comeback.

It’s a testament to what Brady has done in the past that when they managed to score the 2nd of the three scores they needed for a chance that even with under a minute to go and no time outs kicking the ball that you could hear double in the voices of the announcers in a game that should have been over and feel fear in the stadium after Edelman caught that touchdown, but in reality the Texan response was classic Patriot defense by a former Pats defensive coordinator, leave the other team just enough space and just enough time to get close but still lose.