Tag Archives: Impeachment hearings

The Real Bombshell of the Impeachment Hearings, by Ron Paul

Both parties wholeheartedly endorse interventionist policies and endless war. From Ron Paul at ronpaulinstitute.org:

The most shocking thing about the House impeachment hearings to this point is not a “smoking gun” witness providing irrefutable evidence of quid pro quo. It’s not that President Trump may or may not have asked the Ukrainians to look into business deals between then-Vice President Biden’s son and a Ukrainian oligarch.

The most shocking thing to come out of the hearings thus far is confirmation that no matter who is elected President of the United States, the permanent government will not allow a change in our aggressive interventionist foreign policy, particularly when it comes to Russia.

Even more shocking is that neither Republicans nor Democrats are bothered in the slightest!

Continue reading

Sondland: “No One On This Planet” Told Him Aid Was Tied To Investigations

Watch Republican Representative Mike Turner make mincemeat of Democratic star witness Ambassador Gordon Sondland and the main Democratic talking point: that he had first-hand knowledge that Trump had made aid to Ukraine contingent on Ukraine investigating the Biden’s potential corruption.

Republicans and Democrats Agree: Give Vast Snooping Powers to The U.S. Government, by Mac Slavo

A renewal of the Patriot Act is slipping through while the nation and the media is preoccupied with the impeachment circus. From Mac Slavo at shtfplan.com:

Even in our polarized and right vs. left political paradigm, there is one thing both republicans and democrats can agree on: The federal government should have vast snooping powers and conduct mass surveillance on everyone. They simply disagree over who should be in charge of abusing those excessive powers.

The impeachment circus did one thing successfully. It took attention from the government’s mass surveillance programs that are constantly expanded. As Reasonproposed: If Democrats really feared Donald Trump’s exercise of the powers of the presidency, why would they propose extending the surveillance powers of the controversial Patriot Act?

Continue reading

The Pitfalls of a Pit Bull Russophobe, by Ray McGovern

A thing or two has changed since the 1980s, but don’t tell the State Department. From Ray McGovern at antiwar.com:

Like so many other glib ‘Russia experts’ with access to Establishment media, Fiona Hill, who testified Thursday in the impeachment probe, seems three decades out of date.

Fiona Hill’s “Russian-expert” testimony Thursday and her deposition on Oct. 14 to the impeachment inquiry showed that her antennae are acutely tuned to what Russian intelligence services may be up to but, sadly, also displayed a striking naiveté about the machinations of U.S. intelligence.

Hill’s education on Russia came at the knee of the late Professor Richard Pipes, her Harvard mentor and archdeacon of Russophobia. I do not dispute her sincerity in attributing all manner of evil to what President Ronald Reagan called the “Evil Empire.” But, like so many other glib “Russia experts” with access to Establishment media, she seems three decades out of date.

I have been studying the U.S.S.R. and Russia for twice as long as Hill, was chief of CIA’s Soviet Foreign Policy Branch during the 1970s, and watched the “Evil Empire” fall apart. She seems to have missed the falling apart part.

Continue reading

The Shallow State, by Raúl Ilargi Meijer

The hearings are revealing the effort by the Deep State to criminalize Trump’s policy differences with it. From Raúl Ilargi Meijer at theautomaticearth.com:

Roger Stone convicted on all counts. I’m reading through them and see WikiLeaks all over. And yes, he may have been lying about all sorts of things, his contacts with Randy Credico, what he knew when etc etc. But one thing must again be made clear: Stone never had any direct contact with Assange, let alone in some plot to release information that could damage Hillary Clinton.

We can be sure of that because as I’ve said multiple times, Assange has said that did not take place, and Assange couldn’t afford to lie, because the slightest little lie would have turned potential whistleblowers (the real kind, not the fake CIA agent one we see today) away from leaking anything to WikiLeaks. And WikiLeaks was Julian’s life’s work.

He would never have risked that, and he didn’t need to. Moreover, in 2016, the time the Roger Stone story plays, he was still in the Ecuador embassy in London, relatively secure and with all the equipment he wanted at his disposal. The Stone verdict reads like a verdict of WikiLeaks too, but only on the surface, and that only because Assange has been silenced.

Continue reading

Hearing Highlights – Jordan, Stefanik and Ratcliffe Deconstruct Impeachment Narrative… from The Conservative Treehouse

Representatives Jim Jordan, John Ratcliffe, and Elise Stefanik demonstrate the power of questions. From theconservativetreehouse.com, with a hat tip to reader Neil Dunn:

Day One of the Pelosi, Schiff and Lawfare effort to publicly construct support for the impeachment of President Trump ends.  Within the questioning of State Department officials George Kent and Bill Taylor the value of adding Jim Jordan to the hearings became clear.

Jim Jordan, Elise Stefanik and John Ratcliffe methodically deconstructed the false premise advanced by the impeachment crew.  It became clear that both Kent and Taylor held no specific and direct knowledge of the substance behind the claims made by the democrats leading the effort.  Here’s a few highlights starting with Jim Jordan:

Jordan pressed Taylor on how he came to have a “clear understanding” that the U.S. aid to Ukraine was dependent on opening an investigation into Trump’s political rivals. Jordan said there was no “linkage” and Ambassador Taylor said he came to his “clear conclusion” based on what other people said about what other people heard about conversations with other people.

Continue reading→