It’s official: Americans are tuning out the Swamp—and the ratings prove it

Tone-deaf would be an accurate way to describe the Washington political class in general, and it certainly applies to Democrats’ latest impeachment attempt.

For the past two weeks, they’ve rolled out witness after witness for hours of nationally televised hearings. Each testimony had a few things in common, including that all substituted pure speculation in lieu of any actual evidence. But today’s “finale” had something extra: The witnesses weren’t even indirectly involved in the July 25 phone call with Ukraine. They learned about it the same way you did—from the news.

Watch: CNN tries to attack President Trump—and accidentally proves him right.

In fact, one of the two “witnesses” had already left her position when the call occurred. She confirmed her last day at the National Security Council was July 19.

That’s how little respect House Democrats have for the impeachment process—and for the American public. Their witnesses didn’t witness anything. Yet Democrat leaders are so convinced of their ability to shape the media narrative that they bet it wouldn’t matter. They assumed a 40-hour TV circus would be enough to tip public support their way.

Here’s their problem: Viewers quickly figured out there was nothing to see.

The ratings prove it. Simply put, they’re stunning. Despite wall-to-wall media coverage and attention, the first televised impeachment hearing last week drew an estimated 13.8 million viewers—nearly 6 million fewer than when former FBI Director James Comey testified before the Senate two years ago. And this is for impeachment.

Even more telling is what’s happened to viewership as the hearings pressed on. Once it became clear that no real evidence was forthcoming—only more opinions about President Trump from the Swamp—Americans tuned out. Tuesday’s morning session this week averaged 11.4 million viewers. By noon Wednesday, “the local ABC affiliate had ditched impeachment coverage and was airing its regular newscast instead. The Fox station had a daytime talk show,” The Washington Times reported.

Or think of it this way: “There are about 330 million Americans. According to the ratings, nearly 320 million of them aren’t watching the House impeachment proceedings.”

So did we learn anything from today’s witnesses, despite their lack of firsthand knowledge about President Trump’s phone call with Ukraine? Actually, yes:

  • Fiona Hill previously testified that President Trump’s concerns about corruption in Ukraine were well-known and shared by everyone. “He’s not alone, because everyone has expressed great concerns about corruption in Ukraine,” she said.
  • She also warned about the “perceptions of conflicts of interest and ethics” associated with Hunter Biden’s position on the Burisma board.
  • David Holmes acknowledged that Democrats’ political efforts in foreign countries have been inappropriate. After not disputing a question that “Democrats and the Clinton campaign were the source of funds that funded the Steele Dossier,” Holmes was asked whether it is appropriate for political parties to run operatives in foreign countries to dig up dirt on their opponents. “No,” he said.

Meanwhile, the only real thing Democrats have accomplished this month is effectively shutting down Congress. Just today, Speaker Nancy Pelosi shrugged off her party’s chances of approving USMCA, President Trump’s recent trade deal to improve NAFTA for American workers, any time in the foreseeable future.

Why is that? As Politico writes, “she doubts Congress has enough time left to pass the USMCA this year.”

NEW POLL: Support for Impeachment Declines

Sorry, Swamp: Ratings fall flat as most Americans tune out impeachment spectacle

Lieutenant Colonel Vindman as Ukrainian Asset?

The Army’s answer to Seinfeld’s George Costanza, Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman, made quite the statement Tuesday when admitting under oath that he was offered the position of Minister of Defense of Ukraine — three times. Vindman and the Ukrainian official extending the offer now both insist it was a joke, which may be true. But it’s irrelevant.

It should first be noted that a joke isn’t laugh-inducing the third time. All the same, the official making the offer, Ukraine’s former Chairman of the National Security and Defense Council, Oleksander Danylyuk, wouldn’t be the first to overuse a line he fancied funny. But if it actually was funny even the first time, it would only be because of what it reflected: the same thing it would if it was uttered seriously.

And the offer would only be made seriously if it was so clear that the Ukrainian-born Vindman was in Ukraine’s corner, that his passions and heart lay with the nation, that he could be trusted to be loyal to it — maybe even more loyal than he’d be to the U.S.

This reality is also the only reason it would even occur to someone to joke about such a matter; it’s the only thing that would make it funny.

This is, mind you, Exhibit A as to why we have a constitutionally mandated, natural-born requirement for the presidency. It’s also why I wouldn’t mind if this also were a prerequisite for becoming a federal lawmaker, cabinet secretary, Supreme Court justice or military officer.

Oh, I didn’t just pull those four examples out of thin air. That’s exactly what the Mexican Constitution requires. Yes, our troublesome southern neighbor does get some things right.

Call me a nativist or xenophobe, I don’t care; I call it sanity and patriotism. But it’s problematic when someone such as Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) can immigrate here, still sound and act like a foreigner — call herself someone with “the perspective of a foreigner,” which she did — but nonetheless become an official governing the rest of us. Is “congressman” really a job Americans won’t do?

Owing to immigrationism, which perpetuates our insane immigration regime, foreign-born residents in the U.S. now number 44.5 million (as of 2018), constituting their largest population share (13.7 percent) since 1910. This, exacerbated by multiculturalism, which discourages assimilation, leads to the balkanization apparent all around us. (Why do you think identity politics appeals are so effective today?) Of course, having no sense of being one national family increases the chances that immigrants will remain loyal to the only national family they know: their native one.

Enter Alexander Semyonovich Vindman. Born Александр Семёнович Виндман (yes, you read that, uh, not right) in “Kiev, Soviet Union (now Ukraine),” he’s currently Director for European Affairs for the National Security Council. His Wikipedia bio also reads, under the “Military service” category, “Allegiance: United States.” Well, we would hope.

This isn’t just sniping. Home is where the heart is. People are emotional creatures, and attachments created during the formative years are quite change-resistant. A Polish woman I know once exemplified this, saying to me, “No matter where I move, I’ll always be Polish” (she does now live in Poland).

If a child is inculcated when young with love for and attachment to his native land — if he’s married to it emotionally — will he just divorce himself from those feelings because he has a new passport? I wouldn’t bet the house on that. I wouldn’t bet its security, either.

Speaking of which, here’s a question to ponder: If we went to war with any subset of today’s immigrants’ native country, how many of them would be on our side?

This said, many immigrants are fine people. We certainly do have our share of native-born ne’er-do-wells, too, a problem exacerbated by today’s rampant anti-Americanism and moral corruption. Yet I’d ask of anyone who’d contend that native-born status is irrelevant: Would you then propose eliminating the natural-born presidency requirement?

If not, is it reasonable to consider that it may be a prudent prerequisite for other offices as well?

A result of not having such is the situation with the current impeachment hearing, mind you, where a group including foreign-born congressmen sits in judgment of a native-born president.

Of course, this is academic at this point, a “The way things ought to be” fantasy in a land where illegal aliens are sanitized into “undocumented immigrants” and sometimes shown preference over citizens.

In fact, we exalt “immigrant” status so much that many dare not even consider the divided loyalty question today, but Vindman apparently epitomizes it. He also appears as honest as the Soviet overlords in whose territory he was born, having been caught lying to Congress.

Now, will he, like longtime Trump confidant Roger Stone, be thus charged and convicted? I’d say that’s about as likely as a sane change in our nation-rending immigration policy.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Gab (preferably) or Twitter, or log on to SelwynDuke.com.

© All rights reserved.

Some nasty anti-president quotes to offer perspective

The other day, my son Seth, a stalwart conservative in the Marxist swamp of Beverly Hills, posted his thoughts on Facebook. They were picked up by American Thinker and featured in their Blog section. Since then, his piece has gone viral.

Some nasty anti-president quotes to offer perspective

By Seth Swirsky

Here are just a few choice quotes leveled at the president (read to the end):

“The president has continued during the last week to make a fool of himself and to mortify and shame the intelligent people of this great nation.”

“He is evidently a person of very inferior character.”

“The president is a fungus from the corrupt womb of bigotry and fanaticism, a worse tyrant than has existed since the days of Nero.”

“Those who vote for the president’s re-election are traitors.”

“He is universally an admitted failure, has no will, no courage, no executive capacity.”

“There is a strong feeling among those who have seen the president, in the way of business, that he lacks practical talent for the job.  It is thought that there should be more readiness.”

Yes.  These nasty things were said about President…Lincoln. By Democrats and “NeverLincolns” of their day.  All while he won the Civil War and ended slavery.

So keep fighting, President Trump.  While your opponents try everything they can to demean, demoralize, and depose you, the decent people of this country appreciate your tireless efforts in giving us this great economy, a stronger military, better trade deals, and a restored sense of America’s true greatness.

Seth Swirsky is a songwriter and filmmaker living in Los Angeles.

EDITORS NOTE: This American Thinker column is republished with the permission of the author’s mother. © All rights reserved.

Trump is 100% on His Game

In his famous “Thriller” music video, Michael Jackson said, “I’m not like other guys.” I thank God that President Trump is not like other Republicans.

It truly amazes me that many high profile conservatives and Republicans still wish Trump would dial-it-back, don’t be so confrontational and behave more presidential. I feel like saying, “Are you guys nuts? Have you not been paying attention?” Desperate times require desperate measures. Donald Trump is God’s perfect man in the White House for such a time as this.

Do these people who are supposedly on our side not understand what is at stake? If Trump is not reelected in 2020, Democrats will kill healthy babies even after they are born.

Sixteen year old girls will have a double mastectomy without parental consent or knowledge in an absurd attempt to become men.

Democrats will roll out the red carpet to drug dealing and murderous illegals.

along with illegal alien children carrying strange diseases being admitted into our schools. Democrats’ Green New Deal promises to stop air travel, kill the fossil fuel industry and implement a long list of insane job-killing and economy crushing initiatives. You cannot imagine the huge number of jobs Democrats will kill or force overseas. Trump has our economy booming. Black unemployment has hit a new historic low. All of Trump’s unprecedented remarkable successes for America will be flushed down the toilet if Democrats take the White House.

Therefore, I do not care if Trump is, what some would describe as, rude to Democrats and fake news media. These people are arrogant, nasty and view everyday Americans as their inferiors. Every time Trump fearlessly gets into their snooty faces, a huge smile appears on my face and I say, “Thank you God!”

It has been exposed that a few days after Trump was elected in 2016, Democrats, the deep state and fake news media launched their coup to remove him from office. In essence they said, “Screw idiot American voters. We will not allow this guy to interrupt our plans for America’s decline and transformation.”

This is why Washington DC swamp dwellers are infuriated by Trump’s slogan, “Make America Great Again.” They are obsessed with removing Trump from office by any, I repeat any, means necessary.

Frustrated that every play in their Destroy-The-Republican-Playbook has failed against Trump, Democrats’ and fake news medias’ hatred for Trump and his supporters has grown to pure foaming-at-the-mouth rabid insanity.

For you folks on our side who still wish Trump was kinder and gentler, the truth is no other Republican could have survived. Trump’s instincts are perfect to fight and emerge victorious in this openly treasonous and extremely corrupt political climate.

With all due respect, Republicans like Ken Starr still do not comprehend the levels of evil and corruption that are threatening our Constitutional freedoms and rights. Starr said Trump made a mistake “attacking” Yovanovitch in a tweet while she testified in Democrats’ outrageous kangaroo court impeachment hearings. Starr said presidents usually rely on others to defend their position. Again, I say that these are not usual times.

Democrats and fake news media portrayed former US Ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch as a saintly human being, slightly lower than the angels.

Democrats and fake news medias’ heads exploded when Trump dared to tweet the truth about Yovanovitch. She is an Obama loyalist who sought to undermine the new Ukraine president and Trump’s policy. Acting within his presidential authority, Trump wisely fired Yovanovitch.

If Trump did not use his bully pulpit to expose the real Yovanovitch, the public would be deceived. Democrats and fake news media would have sold the American people their lie that Yovanvitch is an innocent sweet woman, unjustly fired by our mean misogynist president.

Starr is an old-school Washington DC guy who believes the president must always behave presidential. The standard rule for Republican presidential behavior is to remain passive and dignified while Democrats and fake news media lies and implements every disgusting trick that their sick minds can conceive to destroy a Republican.

God knew what He was doing when He made a Washington DC outsider leader of the free world. It drives Washington DC elites insane that Trump refuses to be intimidated into allowing them to dictate his behavior, surrendering to Washington DC elites’ one-sided rules of engagement.

But folks, what is truly amazing to watch is every time Trump exposes Democrats and deep state traitors caught with their hands in the corruption-cookie-jar, Democrats and their fake news media minions try to turn it around on Trump; portraying him as the one breaking the law. The insidious evil and arrogance of these people is off the chain.

Rest assured folks, Trump is 100% on his game. Let’s make sure to have his back in 2020.

Remember the lyric in the Billy Joel song, “I love you just the way you are”? Please Mr President, don’t go changin’. We love you just the way you are. 

NEW poll today: The more Americans see, the more they oppose impeachment

If you’re finding it difficult to keep up with all the noise surrounding House Democrats’ ever-changing impeachment saga, you’re not alone. Democrats themselves are having a tough time keeping their stories straight lately.

First, the left had an alleged “quid pro quo” in mind. When that argument didn’t poll well, Democrat leaders changed the accusation to “extortion.” Next came “bribery,”—then back to the original “quid pro quo” catchphrase this morning.

Yes, it’s dizzying. Democrats in Congress right now are throwing every accusation they can think of at the wall, crossing their fingers that something finally sticks. That isn’t a new trick: It’s actually been their only real action item since Election Day 2016.

 President Trump: “I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo.”

Today turned out to be a bad day for Democrats and their media echo chamber to resurrect the old “quid pro quo” narrative. In lengthy testimony before Congress today, Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland put that false accusation to rest.

When Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) tried to put words in Ambassador Sondland’s mouth, the Ambassador was crystal clear:

“President Trump, when I asked him the open-ended question—as I testified previously, ‘What do you want from Ukraine?’—his answer was, ‘I want nothing.’”

No matter how the left tries to spin it, that is the only relevant takeaway from today’s sham hearing. Why? First, because it’s based in fact, not third-party conjecture. Second, it was stated under oath by the only person in these hearings who has ever even spoken directly to President Trump. The other witnesses could only offer opinion and speculation.

And just like that, the Swamp’s carefully choreographed narrative collapsed—again.

The big problem for House Democrats is that after weeks of testimony, they still have no actual evidence to justify effectively shutting down Congress to put Americans through this charade. New polling out today from Marquette University Law School shows that Americans in Wisconsin, for example, now oppose impeaching and removing President Trump by double-digit margins.

But Democrats from Impeachment Czar Schiff to far-left “Squad” member Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) already promised their base that they would impeach President Trump—so no matter what the facts or evidence say, the show must go on.

Even Speaker Nancy Pelosi is beginning to sense how bad this looks for her party. In a desperate letter to colleagues, she encouraged Democrats to stick with the plan—and put in writing that it would be a “weak response” to wait until next year’s election to let the American people decide for themselves who their President should be.

Democrats have told us repeatedly they have no interest in a fair, impartial hearing. It’s time to take them at their word. Fortunately, a majority of Americans may already have.

“At impeachment hearing, irrelevant opinions by Trump critics masquerade as facts”

Must-read: Full statement from Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham 

© All rights reserved.

The Graying of Florida. Voters are getting older.

Not surprising, Florida is a preferred destination for tourists in winter and retirement. We offer plenty of warm sunshine, sports and attractions, golf and tennis, boating and fishing, fine restaurants, comfortable living, no state income tax, southern charm, and aside from the occasional tropical storm, a safe and comfortable environment. People are coming to Florida in droves, either to vacation or live. It is the #1 state where people are moving to. Not surprising, we have a construction boom here.

According to the latest data from the U.S. Census Bureau, over 221.5K people moved to Florida in 2018 alone. The top states where residents are migrating from include:

NY-63.0K (D)
VA-31.7K (D)
PA-31.7K (D)
NJ-30.1K (D)
IL-27.6K (D)
TX-24.1K (R)
OH-22.4K (R)
MI-20.8K (D)
MA-20.3K (D)
SC-15.2K (R)

These people flee their states for a variety of reasons including: inclement weather, jobs, high state taxes, political culture, etc. Some people see themselves as economic refugees escaping from states facing financial instability. In the 2018 Mercatus State Fiscal Rankings, it examined the financial stability of the fifty states, plus Puerto Rico. The report considered debt and financial obligations, as well as state pension programs and health care benefits. From the list above, the following states were ranked at the bottom of the Mercatus study, including: IL (#50), NJ (#48), MA (#47), NY (#41), and PA (#35). As an aside, tiny Connecticut was rated #49 and, even though it had smaller numbers, saw migration to Florida jump 63% in 2018. By the way, Florida is #4 on the list.

Interestingly, I came across another report from the Census Bureau indicating the lion’s share of people coming to Florida are seniors. The Bureau reported the proportion of Florida’s population that is 60 and older is growing more rapidly than other components of the population. They estimate 32.5 percent of Florida’s population will be 60 and older by the year 2030, an increase of 34 percent from 2012.

This means nearly a third of the populace will be seniors thereby creating a voting block to be reckoned with, even beating the Millennials. They also have a better voting turnout record than the youngsters.

Of course, seniors include both Democrats and Republicans, but they generally do not like Socialism and will not vote for it. As much as I would like to believe seniors are predominantly conservative politically, there are many who have gravitated to liberal causes as they grow older. The point is, we will start to see politicians cater more to the interests of seniors, and less toward younger generations. In other words, a shift is in the offing.

One thing I have observed about seniors is that more thought goes into who or what they will vote for. They are active, experienced, inquisitive, and not afraid to debate issues in a calm manner. Seniors are much less impetuous and boisterous than Millennials.

Bottom-line, the face of Florida politics is getting grayer, and the Millennials better watch out.

Keep the Faith!

P.S. – Also do not forget my new books, “How to Run a Nonprofit” and “Tim’s Senior Moments

EDITORS NOTE: This Bryce is Right column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved. All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies

PODCAST: Impeachment Inquiry Is ‘a Trial in Search of a Crime,’ Rep. Jody Hice Says

“They are searching for every haystack they can possibly find in hopes that there’s a needle somewhere that they can bring forward and say, ‘A-ha, we have something to impeach him,’” says Rep. Jody Hice, R-Ga. “And the American people are seeing it for what it is.” Read the lightly edited transcript of the interview, posted below, or listen on this bonus episode of the podcast:

Rachel del Guidice: We’re joined today on The Daily Signal Podcast by Congressman Jody Hice, who represents Georgia’s 10th Congressional District. Congressman Hice, thank you so much for being with us today.

Rep. Jody Hice: Always great to be with you. It’s an honor. Appreciate you having me.

Del Guidice: Well, we love having you. So, last week, House Democrats finished holding their first impeachment hearings on impeaching the president. We heard from Bill Taylor, he’s the acting U.S. ambassador to Ukraine; George Kent, the deputy assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs; and Marie Yovanovitch, the former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine.


Congress is moving to impeach the president. But will their plan to remove him from office succeed? Find out more now >>


So, looking at last week’s hearing, what all did you see from those hearings, and has any kind of information or answers been gleaned? What are your takeaways?

Hice: Yeah, I mean, [there’s] two things really that stand out to me from last week. No. 1, again, it’s all hearsay. No one had direct communication with the president. And that’s really what this whole thing is being built on.

It’s a trial in search of a crime, and there’s no evidence to substantiate any of it at this point. And that’s totally what we had last week. And I thought one of the highlights from last week was when [Rep. John Ratcliffe, R-Texas] specifically asked the witnesses, “Why are we here? What is the impeachable offense?” And none of them had an answer.

There’s absolute stunned silence. And that just reiterated the reality that the majority, the Democrats, are moving the goal post on even what the impeachable offense is. And of course, now it’s gone from “quid pro quo” to extortion to bribery.

And I mean, they’re bouncing all over the place themselves, trying to convince the American people of a crime that didn’t happen. And so they’re trying to fabricate a crime. And that was really what came out from last week to me.

Del Guidice: So, you’ve criticized this impeachment process as a sham. Can you talk a little bit about that and why you see it as a sham?

Hice: Yeah, absolutely. I mean, something as important as an impeachment inquiry impacts our entire nation. It’s something that, if we’re going to go down this path, then it needs to be done honestly. It needs to be done openly. It needs to be done with transparency, and with an authentic desire to find the truth.

That has not been the case in this sham. And that’s exactly what it is. For two months, we were in the basement of the Capitol with no transparency. No even attempt seriously to find the the truth.

[House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif.] only allowed individuals to come testify who he thought would have damaging testimony toward the president. The president was not able to defend himself.

We were not able to call forth any of our witnesses as the minority party. It was all a one-sided show. We were limited. Members of Congress were not permitted to participate unless you were on certain committees, and even then it was very difficult to get transcripts, and yet none of it was classified information.

What it ended up being is, really, two months of an audition for Schiff to determine who he thought would be the best witnesses to go public. Which is what he’s now trying to do. But again, it is an unfair process of not genuinely seeking the truth.

It’s all the left Democrats, who hate the president, who want to turn the 2016 election around, and they are trying to do everything they can to discredit and disenfranchise the voters of 2016.

Del Guidice: So, on Tuesday, House Democrats started the second week of open impeachment hearings. And so far we’ve heard from Lt. Col. [Alexander] Vindman. He’s the top Ukraine specialist at the National Security Council. He testified, as well as Jennifer Williams, who’s a foreign service aide in Vice President [Mike] Pence’s office who listened to a call between Trump and the Ukraine’s president.

What did you think of both of their testimonies, of Vindman’s testimony and Williams’ testimony?

Hice: Still, it’s nothing new. It’s more of the same old, same old. … Look, in this whole thing, there’s only one person who matters, and that is the president of the United States.

What did he say? And we have that transcript, that transcript is readily available for anyone and everyone to read. And it says what it says. And the president of Ukraine, President [Volodymyr] Zelenskyy, took it just the way the president, President Trump, said it was.

There was no quid pro quo, there was no conditions to the aid. Ukraine was not even aware that any aid was being withheld. And so how do you formulate an impeachable offense that didn’t happen?

And so what we have are individuals giving testimony of their opinion. We have people giving testimony who don’t like the foreign policy of the president. What is the president’s job, to submit foreign policy? And if they don’t like it, that’s their prerogative. But it certainly is not an impeachable offense if they don’t like the president’s foreign policy.

So it’s more of the same old argument that the Democrats continue to bring forth, … charges with absolutely zero evidence to substantiate the charge.

Del Guidice: So, you mentioned the fact of zero evidence. … Looking ahead to hearings later this week, we’re hearing a lot of the same old, same old, as you mentioned, and nothing impeachable has been raised so far. So what do you foresee as happening if none of that evidence actually surfaces?

Hice: Well, this thing is collapsing day by day, literally moment by moment, as they continue to proceed forward with it, because there is no evidence there. And the American people, as this is becoming public, as people are watching it, they’re getting fatigued, quite frankly, from a hearing that has nothing to support the so-called impeachable offenses, which even the Democrats themselves can’t even define what that offense might be. And so, the American people are seeing firsthand that this is a hoax.

It is a continuation of a witch hunt that began three years ago, when the president was inaugurated. Within days after his inauguration, there were [some] saying already that they were going to impeach him. And he hadn’t even had time to get in the office and get started. Yet, this has been an undertaking of the Democratic Party for three years.

They are searching for every haystack they can possibly find in hopes that there’s a needle somewhere that they can bring forward and say, “Aha, we have something to impeach him.” And the American people are seeing it for what it is.

Del Guidice: So, you sit on the [House Oversight and Reform Committee], and you attended several of the closed-door depositions that happened. I’m curious if there’s anything you can share from what you observed. And as a second point to that, have Democrats even been following proper procedure when it comes to the impeachment process?

Hice: They’ve been making the rules up and the procedure up as they go. And that’s one of the frustrating things with us. The goal post has been moving all along the way. And so, I cannot get into specifics, because we are strictly forbidden from speaking about what happened in those depositions.

But I can say from a general perspective that it has been the most unfair treatment that I’ve ever seen.

I’m shocked that this type of trial, which is really what it is, is taking place in the United States, where we have only one side permitted to speak, only one side permitted to call forth witnesses, and the other side … during those depositions was not able to do anything.

The president unable to defend himself, and we [being] unable to bring forth witnesses from our side of the equation, has been the most unfair thing I’ve ever seen in my life. And I just hope that as this becomes more public, that the American people will recognize that and will reject this attempt by the Democrats to destroy and harm the president.

Del Guidice: So, looking ahead to the rest of the hearings this week, I believe Fiona Hill is scheduled to testify, she was the top Russia specialist at the National Security Council, as well as David Holmes, who’s a State Department official. Do you have any forecasts of what you expect to see, or just more of the same?

Hice: Yeah, expect more of the same. It would be kind of foolish for me to try to speculate what any of them are going to say or testify. So I won’t try to go down that hypothetical route, but, again, would say that the only conversation that matters is the conversation that President Trump had with President Zelenskyy. And that conversation we have. And in that conversation is absolutely nothing impeachable.

There was nothing of demands. There were no preconditions put upon the funding. In fact, this president has funded the Ukraine with lethal weapons to defend themselves against Russia. Something that President [Barack] Obama never did.

And … just a couple of months ago, the Democrats were accusing President Trump of colluding with Russia. And yet President Trump is the one who is providing aid, lethal aid, to Ukraine to defend themselves against Russia.

And so, that is the conversation that matters. The one that the president had with President Zelenskyy, and everything else is just opinion and presumption, made-up opinions, as to what the president really meant. When what he said is right there in clear view. And what he said is exactly the way President Zelenskyy interpreted it.

Del Guidice: President Trump has also said he’s open to contributing his own testimony to Democrats’ impeachment hearings. Do you think he should testify? What is your perspective on that?

Hice: Well, my perspective is he already has. He was not forced to provide the transcript and he did. He voluntarily put it out there. This past week, [he] came out with the second conversation he had with President Zelenskyy. Again, he was not compelled to do so. He is being transparent and open with the conversation that he had. And you know, what he decides to do beyond that is a decision I’m sure that he and other advisers around him will make.

But in my opinion, the president has already exhibited tremendous transparency and a willingness to cooperate. And providing the transcript itself is evidence enough of that.

Del Guidice: One of your colleagues in the House, Congressman Jim Jordan, he had tweeted something early this week that I feel like laid out the situation really well. And he had said that “in the 55 days that aid to Ukraine was delayed, President Zelenskyy had five calls and meetings with high-ranking American officials. And in every one of those meetings, there was never a discussion of linking aid to investigating the Bidens.”

If this is true, and we’ve seen the transcripts, you’ve been talking about that, why isn’t this being discussed in these hearings?

Hice: You know, you’d have to ask the Democrats that. I think the Republican side has done a great job bringing up those facts in this whole thing. Not only were there no preconditions in the phone call, but as you just mentioned, in the five meetings that took place afterward, there was no mention of any conditions in order for aid to come forward.

And so again, this is all nothing but individuals’ opinions, basically saying what we know, the funds went, but what the president really meant was to hold up those funds until we had the investigation on the Bidens or until we had whatever that they claim.

But the fact is, none of that holds up to what actually happened in those meetings that took place following the phone call. Again, our factual evidence that there was no intent for preconditions in the funds that were going to Ukraine.

Del Guidice: So, impeachment definitely has overtaken all of Washington right now and especially Congress in the House as they’re holding these hearings. Is there anything Congress should be doing other than holding these impeachment hearings?

Hice: Well, the first thing we should do is close the door on these impeachment hearings. It’s an absolute hoax in every way.

But yeah, I mean, the Democrats have been so focused on destroying the president and proceeding with this impeachment inquiry that they have accomplished absolutely nothing since they have been the majority here in the House. And there are multiple issues that need to be addressed.

I mean, we haven’t even funded the government, and now that is hanging over our head. We haven’t funded the military. We have drug pricing that needs to be addressed. We have trade deals, the USMCA, that needs to be addressed.

There are multiple issues that are extremely important to the well-being of our country and to every one of our constituents, be it Republican or Democrat. But they have been so focused on one single item, and that is to impeach the president, that they have shown their absolute inability to legislate and do what the American people sent us here to do.

Del Guidice: Final question: What do your constituents in Georgia think about all these impeachment hearings?

Hice: You know, we’ve got 750,000, 800,000, and there are different individuals, different parties that are represented, but overwhelmingly, the people in the 10th District of Georgia are fed up with this impeachment inquiry. They see it for what it is. They want it to come to a stop.

They see the actions of this president and the policies of this president are working in our economy. They’re working in reestablishing the strength of our military. They’re working across the board, impacting individual lives.

They appreciate this president stands for life. He stands for religious liberties. And they want us to continue supporting this president, and they want this impeachment inquiry to come to an end.

I believe, at the end of the day, this is going to prove to be an absolute disaster for the Democrats, and in my opinion, well, it should be.

Del Guidice: Congressman Hice, thank you so much for joining us today on The Daily Signal Podcast.

Hice: Always an honor to be with you. Thank you so much.

PODCAST BY

Rachel del Guidice

Rachel del Guidice is a congressional reporter for The Daily Signal. She is a graduate of Franciscan University of Steubenville, Forge Leadership Network, and The Heritage Foundation’s Young Leaders Program. Send an email to Rachel. Twitter: @LRacheldG.

RELATED VIDEO: Trump remarks on Sondland testimony: ‘I want nothing’ from Ukraine

RELATED ARTICLES: 

7 Key Moments From Gordon Sondland’s Testimony on Day 4 of Impeachment Hearings

Lt. Col. Vindman Destroyed Democrats’ Main Impeachment Arguments

‘Coup’ Concerns Suddenly Don’t Seem So Far-fetched

Impeachment Hearings Have Exposed What Democrats Have Become

Pence’s Chief of Staff Slams Dems: Ironically, You’re Holding Up Aid to Ukraine to Pursue Impeachment

Ukrainian MP Claims $7.4 Billion Obama-Linked Laundering, Puts Biden Group Take At $16.5 Million

Problematic Women: Christine Blasey Ford, Chick-Fil-A, and Impeachment


A Note for our Readers:

As we speak, Congress is moving to impeach the president.

We do not have all the facts yet, but based on what we know now, there does not seem to be an impeachable offense.

The questions stand: In drafting the Constitution, how did America’s founders intend for impeachment to be used? How does the impeachment process work, and what can history tell us about whether or not President Trump faces the real threat of being removed from office?

The Heritage Foundation is making this guide available to all readers of The Daily Signal for free today!

GET YOUR FREE COPY NOW! >>


EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Sanders Burns the 2020 Democratic Primary Gun Control Agenda

As anti-gun as the 2020 Democratic presidential contenders have exposed themselves to be, much of the field still gives lip-service to the Second Amendment and the Constitution. Take for instance Joe Biden. The leading candidate’s campaign has said that Biden will seek to “respect the Second Amendment” and that “as president, Biden will pursue constitutional, common-sense gun safety policies.” However, take a critical look at the vast majority of the Democratic field for any limiting principle that would preclude even the most severe forms of gun control (like gun confiscation) and you will come up wanting.

To his credit, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) has once again injected some much-needed sanity into a Democratic presidential primary. Speaking at a November 10 campaign rally in Charles City, Iowa, the candidate was asked about his opinion on a “mandatory buyback” (properly understood as confiscation) of commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms like AR-15s. Sanders responded by stating, “I don’t support, a mandatory buyback is essentially confiscation, which I think is unconstitutional.” The senator went on to add, “It means that I am going to walk into your house and take something whether you like it or not. I don’t think that stands up to constitutional scrutiny.”

Unfortunately, Sanders’s moment of lucidity was brief. The candidate went on to express his support for the criminalization of private firearms transfers and a ban on the sale of commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms.

The senator also provided unwitting attendees with a misimpression of current law by suggesting an individual could “buy a dozen guns legally” and sell them to criminals without facing legal repercussions. Of course, 18 U.S.C. 922(d) makes it unlawful for “any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person” is prohibited from possessing firearms. A violation of this provision is punishable by up to 10 years imprisonment.

However wrong Sanders might be about a slew of gun control measures, he is right about the confiscation of commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms.

In the landmark case District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court concluded that the Second Amendment protected ownership of the type of firearms “in common use at the time” for “lawful purposes like self-defense.” The National Shooting Sports Foundation estimates that there are more than 16 million commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms possessed by law-abiding Americans. The AR-15 is the most popular rifle in America, and therefore is in “common use.” Gun control advocates seem to agree that such semi-automatic rifles are common, considering they routinely complain about the “proliferation” of these firearms.

Heller opinion author Justice Antonin Scalia later reiterated the fact that the decision precluded bans on commonly-owned semi-automatics when he signed onto a dissent from denial of certiorari in the case of Friedman v. Highland Park. The dissent, written by Justice Clarence Thomas, couldn’t have been clearer:

Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles. The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting. Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons.

Further, as Justice Brett Kavanaugh noted during his time on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in a dissent in District of Columbia v. Heller, U.S. Supreme Court precedent required gun control measures to be scrutinized in the context of the Second Amendment’s “text, history, and tradition.” A confiscation effort the likes of which has been backed by several of the 2020 Democratic presidential candidates has no validity when examined under this framework.

This wasn’t the first time Sanders has brought a measure of reason to a Democratic presidential primary. During a 2016 Democratic primary debate, Sanders was challenged on his vote for the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. The PLCAA was enacted to protect the firearms industry from frivolous lawsuits resulting from a third party’s criminal misuse of a firearm. The act codified long-standing principles of tort law.

During the debate, Sanders stated,

Well, this is what I say, if I understand it — and correct me if I’m wrong. If you go to a gun store and you legally purchase a gun, and then, three days later, if you go out and start killing people, is the point of this lawsuit to hold the gun shop owner or the manufacturer of that gun liable? If that is the point, I have to tell you I disagree…. what you’re really talking about is ending gun manufacturing in America. I don’t agree with that.

According to USA Today, the Senator later told reporters that permitting frivolous suits against the gun industry could result in “shutting down the entire industry.” Sanders added, “If Secretary Clinton’s position is that there should not be any more guns in America, fine… She should be honest and say that, because that is really what that means.”

Sanders is not a champion of gun rights. The senator merely appears to understand that there is some limit to the government’s power to trample upon the Constitutional rights of the American people. The fact that his comment stands out in the 2020 Democratic race is more a testament to his deranged opponents than his love of liberty. It’s a bizarre season when the “Democratic Socialist” is the most centrist Democratic presidential candidate on guns.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Joe Biden and His Gift for Gaffes

No Protection for the Law that Protects the Firearm Industry: Supreme Court Passes on PLCAA Case

Trading Freedom for Safety

EDITORS NOTE: This NRA-ILA column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Psychiatrists, Impeachment, and Justice

After a period of silence, Dr. Bandy Lee and her committee of mental-health “experts” have again burst onto the scene, angling to participate in the impeachment of President Trump. They are defying the Goldwater Rule, which holds that it is unethical for physicians to diagnose patients they have not personally examined. They claim that President Trump is a such a serious threat to the nation that they are allowed to violate rules.

“We don’t believe there is the need for any further evaluation, and we are making ourselves available for the impeachment hearing because we believe that mental health issues will become critical as pressures from the impeachment hearings mount,” Dr. Lee told the Washington Examiner. “In other words, the more successful the impeachment proceedings become, the more dangerous the psychological factors of the president will become.”

Obviously, the thing to do is to increase the psychological pressure on a person you declare to be unstable.

Dr. Lee’s “medical assessment” of the President’s “mental capacity to fulfill the duties of his office” includes the examination of tweets, public appearances, and the 448-page Mueller report. “There is very little that a personal examination will add,” Lee said.

She denies that she is actually making a diagnosis. Indeed, “unfitness for office” is an opinion, a conclusion that is not in the DSM, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of currently defined psychiatric diagnoses.

Regardless of one’s opinion about President Trump, this self-appointed “Independent Expert Panel for Presidential Fitness” should concern all Americans. Where does a group of academic experts get the ability or the authority to determine whether the President is “capable of keeping the country safe”?

The U.S. Constitution provides several methods of “regime change,” which is what Congressional Democrats, the mainstream news media, and this Panel seem

determined to achieve. The first is elections. In 2016, Americans voted for a change from the policies of Obama and Clinton and the imbedded bureaucracy. Ever since then, the losers have been seeking to nullify this result. Attacks on the President by the press have been unrelenting. Unlike Abraham Lincoln or Woodrow Wilson, this President has not imprisoned any journalists or shut down any newspapers. But he does make sarcastic remarks—and his opponents would like to deny him the forum of social media.

Second is the 25th Amendment, which provides for the removal of a President for incapacity. This might have removed Woodrow Wilson after a devastating stroke had it been in existence at the time. It requires action by the Vice President and a majority of executive officers or a body appointed by Congress—not a few activist academics. This has so far been a non-starter.

Finally, there is impeachment, for “high crimes and misdemeanors.” In American jurisprudence, proceedings are supposed to be triggered by a crime—not by the Soviet KGB method of “show me the man, and I will name his crime.” Or worse, “KGB Plus”—show me the man, and I will invent his crime.

In a world where there are so many ever-changing rules that everyone might be inadvertently committing “three felonies a day,” anyone could be prosecuted. But one is at least supposed to have certain rights: confronting the accuser, assistance of counsel, access to all the evidence, the right to call and cross-examine witnesses. And knowing exactly what the charges are.

Why should psychiatrists be intruding themselves into this legal process? Are there Thought Crimes that they have a special ability to discern?

Ordinary Americans should be very concerned. If this can happen to the President, it can happen to them. And it does.

One alarming example is the “fitness for duty” evaluations to which physicians may be subjected by people who for some reason want to destroy them. There are virtually no due-process rights. The examiner has the status of a physician, but no obligation to act in the “patient’s” (target’s) best interest. Some psychiatrists may presume to have god-like power to judge a person’s emotions, intentions, and capacity—asserted in the name of safety or “security.” “Red flag” laws are another example.

President Trump may be right in saying: “They’re not coming for me. They are coming for you. I’m just in the way.”

Bandy Lee and associates are showing us a method to remove undesirables if legal process fails.

© All rights reserved.

Soviet Style Impeachment in America!

“You bring me the man and I’ll show you the crime.” – Laverty Beria, Chairman of the secret police in the USSR.


Only those people who know Evil can understand and appreciate Goodness. We the former citizens from the Socialist countries know what Evil means, we lived under the “Evil Regime” half of our life. In considering Ukraine you have to know that “Evil Regime.” I sat in courtrooms of the USSR for 25 years and Adam Schiff in his impeachment inquiry has brought me back to the Soviet court in America. Like in the Mueller Report the main principle of American justice system, the presumption of innocent is missing in action. Adam Schiff is forming the narrative: extortion, bribery, shredding the norm, and undermining the rule of law. It is a partisan, political exercise masked by the impeachment inquiry to affect public opinion…

The Tragedy of Ukraine

Ukraine is a wonderful country of a magnificently fertile land and hard-working people and three generations of Ukrainians have lived under the “Evil-Regime” of the Soviet Socialist system. A normal human being from the West can’t perceive the depth of the corruption the system has created. And nobody in the Dems’ impeachment inquiry debating Ukraine, including Maria Yovanovich could understand the tragedy of the country created by the Socialist mafia. As the Dems proceed further in their inquiry, the more and more their incompetence will be exposed…  The American people haven’t the remotest idea of what is happening in Ukraine.

To grasp the extent of corruption in Ukraine you have to know the Soviet Socialist system—the system of total corruption from the bottom to the top, regardless of race, class, or nationality. The system existed, lived and breathed corruption. The Socialist mob in Ukraine includes a large portion of Russians in the population and many oligarchs collaborating with Russia. That segment of the population helped to elect President of Ukraine Victor Yanukovych 2010-2914 and thereafter Soviet corruption continued to flourish: President of Ukraine Victor Yanukovych had a Gold Toilet bowl in his castle, when many Ukrainians did not have enough food to survive.

The corruption in Ukraine continued with President Peter Poroshenko and the election in 2019 exposed the human outrage of Ukrainians, voting 75% for President Zelensky. For your information, the hero of the radical left, former U.S. ambassador Maria Yovanovich had supported Peter Poroshenko, a man who collaborated with Putin. This was her understanding of events in Ukraine. Please read about two real events:

Late last month OANN investigative journalist and author Jack Posobiec posted a series of tweets detailing Rep. Adam Schiff’s actions this past month after receiving the CIA ‘whistleblower’ report on President Trump’s phone call with the newly elected Ukrainian President. Schiff sent a staffer to Ukraine to meet with the former President Poroshenko after receiving the ‘whistleblower’ report. This trip was sponsored by a think tank that receives funding from a program of left-wing billionaire George Soros’ Open Society Foundation called “Open Society Initiative for Europe”

Breaking: Ukrainian Government Ready to Cooperate with FBI on Laundering Hundreds of Millions of IMF Aid Money, American Truth Today

I was very suspicious of Yovanovich and suddenly Ukraine gave me another reason to talk about the Obama/Putin conspiracy. Writing about the Obama/Putin conspiracy for the last 8-10 years, I considered Obama a Socialist in the worse sense of the word, but I didn’t know about Ukraine. The quote above tells me even more. We are dealing with a syndicate of the Deep State, liar Schiff, Socialist mafia, and the KGB political operative George Soros. I wrote about Soros for many years: he has undermined and harmed America for thirty years. This syndicate is following and serving the ideology of Soviet Fascism…

The Ideology of Soviet Fascism

In 1991 Soviet Socialism collapsed in Russia—it was the Socialist economy, unable to produce that collapsed, but another part of the system of “the Evil Regime,” all punitive agencies survived and brought to the Russian presidency their guy, Vladimir Putin. I use the term KGB talking about them. All the agencies, coordinated by the KGB, helped the Socialist system to survive for many years, yet now Socialism ended in the country where it was born. But the KGB continued using the ideology of Communism/Socialism to prolong its life. The war against Western civilization is intact and history can determine the new term identifying the system based on militant, aggressive and expansionist force in Russia. I did it many years ago calling it Soviet fascism and knowledge of Stalinism had provided me with the adequate definition of the ideology:

Using the militant force of the KGB, Stalin combined and unified the concept of “aggressive oriental despotism” with the ideology of Soviet Socialism. Then Stalinists infiltrated and used Islam to benefit Stalin’s ideological agenda to conquer Western civilization and the world. That was one of the reasons, I began calling Soviet Socialism, Soviet Fascism. I wouldn’t be surprised by an assassination attempts on Donald J. Trump.

I know Soviet fascism, they had tried to poison Chairman Mao Zedong…

Regrettably, our Intel and academia missed the significance of the year 1991, the death of Socialist economy and they gave an additional time to Putin and his KGB to proceed. Today we are dealing with the countries of “the Axis of Evil” who adhere to the ideology of Soviet Fascism confronting Western civilization globally in the 21st century. I identified this ideology years ago. To grasp the events in Ukraine, you have to know ideology of Soviet fascism, and Obama/Putin conspiracy, described in my two books: What is Happening to America? Xlibris, 2012, and Socialist Lies: From Stalin to the Clintons, Obamas, and Sanders, Xlibris, 2016.

Ukraine and the Biden Father and Son

The year 2014 was a taut and crucial year for Ukraine: Russia invaded and occupied Crimea, Russia directed the Ukrainian Socialist mob to attack the Ukrainian territory in Donbas and Lugansk—the war against Ukrainian people had begun. And the tragedy is that Ukraine wasn’t ready to fight—the country didn’t have an army, weaponry and ammunition—Ukraine was naked due to the policy of Russian crony President of Ukraine Victor Yanukovych. Thousands of Ukrainians were killed, a lot of territory was lost. Yanukovych fled to Russia to escape the wrath of the Ukrainian people and President Obama sent Joe Biden to Ukraine as a point man in 2014.

Vice-President Biden did not bring arms, ammunition or weaponry Ukraine desperately needed, Biden brought his son—Hunter Biden. And America’s Socialist mafia very easily found a common language with the Ukrainian Socialist mob—their common denomination was corruption. It was then that the Ukrainian people lost respect for the government of the U.S. It was then in 2014 the Ukrainian people took their destiny in their own hands.  Volunteers with hunting rifles, some with knifes went to defend their country and died in the thousands, they sacrificed for their children to live in an Independent Ukraine. Books and movies will be produced about that tragic and heroic time in Ukraine and… America’s betrayal of Ukraine in 2014.

Knowing this in 2019, I believe that Obama had in mind to use Biden and his son in Ukraine. There was no more Putin’s crony, Yanukovych, and Obama needed a conduit to Putin there in Ukraine to continue to undermine the country. As I understand it today, Obama and Poroshenko worked like hand and glove—Obama found a conduit in Ukraine and the action against the American republic to help Russia begun. When Trump had announced his candidacy the entire focus and emphasis has been aimed at Trump—the plot against him has preoccupied the conspirators… The plotters had a solid foundation—President of Ukraine Peter Poroshenko. I hope politicians will find the Truth…

I am interested in the Biden Father and Son. The Ukrainian scandal is the same Russian attempt to oust President Trump. In reality it was a predicate of Trump/Russia collusion, which started in 2014 by Biden, assigned to Ukraine by Obama. So, how is it possible that a foreigner, Hunter, in Ukraine with no knowledge of Ukrainian or Russian, among  thousands of firms, could latch onto the board of Burisma, the energy firm owned by the Russian-crony, a friend of another Russian crony former President Victor Yanukovych? This is my guess: the war on America and Obama/Putin conspiracy is much deeper than we know and a lot of bad actors are still walking free…

The Trump impeachment will be a victory for Vladimir Putin, a mortal enemy of President Trump. The fraudulent impeachment is also aimed at changing public opinion by fraud and sham. The GOP is missing the elephant in the room: the international syndicate of the Socialist mafia. I can see its action—The Brain-Washing War on America’s Mind and Soul is going on. We are dealing with the aggressive force of the Dems’ Socialist mafia fighting the Constitutional American Republic. The Dems are fighting for power by impeachment proceeding to cover-up the sinister crime of TREASON against the American Republic they have committed over several decades. This crime committed by the leadership of Dems’ Socialist mafia, and DNC should be a major topic in the November 2020 election.

President Trump is right—our democracy is at stake!

To be continued www.simonapipko1.com and at www.drrichswier.com/author/spipko/.

© All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

WATCH: Dana Bash Falls Flat on Her Face When Trying to Defend Dems Changing Their ‘Quid Pro Quo’ Messaging

Why Democrats Don’t Want Public to Know Origins of Ukraine Probe

The Impeachment-Promoting Press Bores the Public

6 Reasons to Believe Left Hates America

Whenever leftists are charged with not loving or even with hating America, they respond angrily, labeling the question absurd, mean-spirited, and an example of right-wing McCarthyism.

But there can be little doubt that the left has no love for America, just as there can be little doubt that liberals and conservatives love America. Love of America is one of the many dividing lines between liberalism and leftism. (For a description of six differences between liberalism and leftism, please see my PragerU video “Left or Liberal?”)

Here are six reasons to believe the left hates America:

1. No one denies that the international left—the left in Europe, Asia, Latin America, and elsewhere—hates America. Therefore, in order to argue that American leftists do not hate America, one would have to argue that on one of the most fundamental principles of international leftism—hatred of America—American leftists differ with fellow leftists around the world: All the world’s left hates the U.S., but the American left loves it.


Congress is moving to impeach the president. But will their plan to remove him from office succeed? Find out more now >>


This, of course, makes no sense. Leftists around the world agree on every important issue. Why, then, would they differ with regard to America? Has any leftist at The New York Times, for example, written one column critical of the international left’s anti-Americanism?

2. Leftists want to “fundamentally transform” the United States. Five days before the 2008 presidential election, candidate Barack Obama told a huge audience in Columbia, Missouri, “We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”

More recently, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren announced that she plans to “fundamentally transform our government,” that America needs “big, structural change,” and that her proposed Accountable Capitalism Act would bring about “fundamental change.”

Likewise, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders said earlier this year, “We’re going to try to transform the United States of America,” and last month he said, “This campaign is about fundamental change.”

Examples are legion.

So, here’s a question: How can one claim to love what one wishes to fundamentally transform?

The answer is obvious: It isn’t possible.

If a man were to confide to you that he wants to fundamentally transform his wife, would you assume he loves his wife? If a woman were to tell you she wants to fundamentally transform her husband, would you assume she loves him? Of course not.

3. Leftists have contempt for the American flag.

I am unaware of a single left-wing individual or organization that has condemned NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick for refusing to stand for the flag during the playing or singing of the national anthem that precedes NFL games. To the contrary, on the left, he is universally regarded as a hero. Indeed, Nike anointed him as one, making him its brand model.

Leftists might respond that Kaepernick’s public refusal to stand for the flag and national anthem says nothing about his love for America, as it is only a form of protest against racial injustice. But that is nonsense. Would leftists argue that anyone who publicly refuses to celebrate Martin Luther King Jr. Day really loves Dr. King?

4. Leftists routinely describe America as racist, sexist, xenophobic, imperialist, genocidal, homophobic, obsessed with money, and morally inferior to most Western European countries. No moral person could love such a place. As one person commenting on a Paul Krugman column wrote, “Does loving your country mean you love or ignore the fact that we destroyed Iraq, shot down an Iranian commercial airliner, and waged a brutal war in Asia for reasons that today make no sense?”

5. America is the most successful country in world history—while being the most committed to capitalism and remaining the most religious of all the industrialized democracies. To the extent that America is great, that means two of the institutions the left most loathes—Christianity and capitalism—are also great.

6. Love is, among other things, an emotion. So, here is a question about leftists’ emotions: Do any leftists get the chills when the national anthem is played or when they see the American flag waving as the anthem is played? Given their rhetoric, it is most unlikely. Yet, every person I know who loves America does get a chill at such moments. Do leftists, as opposed to some liberals and conservatives, display the flag on any national holiday? How many leftists even own a flag?

Finally, if leftists do not love America, what do they love?

According to their own rhetoric, they love the planet—Mother Earth, as they frequently refer to it. And they love animals.

They really love power, and they claim to love material equality.

They don’t love Western culture—and they now dismiss praise for it as a euphemism for white supremacy.

Interestingly, while they often claim to love humanity, many don’t seem to love people. They give less charity and volunteer less time to the downtrodden than conservatives, for example. They have much less interest in having children and making families. They are far more likely than conservatives to cut off relations with friends or relatives with whom they differ politically. And if they really loved people, they would love capitalism because only capitalism has lifted billions of people from poverty.

But most of all, they love … themselves.

COPYRIGHT 2019 CREATORS.COM

COMMENTARY BY

Dennis Prager is a columnist for The Daily Signal, nationally syndicated radio host, and creator of PragerU. Twitter: .

RELATED ARTICLES:

Illinois School District Gives Transgender Students Unrestricted Access to Bathrooms

Whatever Happened to Teaching History?

Rep. Ilhan Omar’s Chilling Ignorance of History


A Note for our Readers:

As we speak, Congress is moving to impeach the president.

We do not have all the facts yet, but based on what we know now, there does not seem to be an impeachable offense.

The questions stand: In drafting the Constitution, how did America’s founders intend for impeachment to be used? How does the impeachment process work, and what can history tell us about whether or not President Trump faces the real threat of being removed from office?

The Heritage Foundation is making this guide available to all readers of The Daily Signal for free today!

GET YOUR FREE COPY NOW! >>


EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

3 must-see moments from Impeachment, Day 1,033

The Washington Swamp often likes to think they alone run our country, with input from voters serving, at most, as a pesky inconvenience. That’s why House Democrats and their “star witnesses” keep claiming, day after day, that President Donald J. Trump is somehow at odds with America’s “stated foreign policy.” By America’s, they mean their own.

Let’s be clear: The President, duly elected by the American people, is the one who sets the foreign policy of the United States. Career bureaucrats and political appointees, while entitled to their own opinions, do not. That’s how constitutional democracies work.

Yet during hours and hours of hearings that have effectively shut down Congress this month, Americans are being treated to just that: opinions. Every single time House Republicans ask the witnesses for any actual evidence of crimes or impeachable offenses committed by the President, none is offered. That’s because those crimes don’t exist.

Today’s hearing followed the same script. Alexander Vindman—who testified for hours on national TV—has never met the President, said that he has no way of knowing what the President was thinking on Ukraine, and admitted that his testimony was based on nothing more than his own personal opinions and feelings.

America learned nothing new. A few witnesses, Vindman included, actually confirmed the accuracy of the White House call transcript between President Trump and President Zelensky. Vindman even acknowledged the corruption surrounding Burisma and that Hunter Biden didn’t appear qualified to serve on the company’s board, leaving the door open for a potential conflict of interest.

Most important for Americans outside the Beltway Swamp, it’s been more than 1,000 days of Democrats’ nonstop impeachment and investigations. Every hour wasted staging TV infomercials for the left is another hour that Congress isn’t passing a budget, isn’t approving USMCA to fix NAFTA for American workers, isn’t addressing our broken immigration system, isn’t working to lower medicine prices, and isn’t working for you.

With that in mind, here are 3 moments that tell you everything you need to know:

Rep. Adam Schiff invents fake quotes from President Trump—again!

Reminder: The President sets foreign policy, not unelected staff.

President Trump: While Democrats did nothing, America created $11 trillion.

© All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump Approval Holds Steady in Face of Impeachment Probe

Everything You Missed From The Third Day Of Public Impeachment Hearings – Highlights

Impeachment Witness Debunks Daily Mail Headline About His Own Testimony

‘Go For A Walk’: Greg Gutfeld And CNN’s Oliver Darcy Lock Horns Over ‘The Five’ Impeachment Hearing Commentary

Memo Given To Fusion GPS Described Ukrainian Lawmaker As Potential ‘Conduit’ For Publicizing Information

VIDEO: Did ABC News protect pedophile Jeffrey Epstein’s accomplices?

About three years ago ABC News buried a blockbuster story about Jeffrey Epstein, referred to by Attorney Brad Edwards as “…the most prolific pedophile this country has ever known.”

The United States Congress is now asking questions.

It’s time for ABC News President James Goldston to tell the American public and members of Congress why ABC quashed the Epstein story.

A few weeks ago Project Veritas confronted Goldston for comment, you can view the video here.

https://twitter.com/JamesOKeefeIII/status/1191795956397813763?s=20

He needs to explain why ABC News hasn’t published a follow-up story.

Information including leads and potential accomplices as identified in the report compiled by Amy Robach would prove invaluable to law enforcement.

James Goldston, an award-winning producer for news and documentary programming in Great Britain and whose wife is an anchor/correspondent for the BBC network, needs to come clean.

Page Six reported on June 4, 2019 that Goldston – who has dual American and British citizenship – and his wife attended a dinner in London to honor Prince Charles and Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall.

James Goldston, who are you protecting?

From our video exposing ABC News, Amy Robach stated that when Prince Andrew was implicated, “the Palace…threatened us a million different ways.”

Could the loss of interviews with the Royal Family on the eve of a Royal wedding be justification for protecting a pedophile and his accomplices?

ABC News, owned by Disney Corporation, may have jeopardized the safety and lifelong wellbeing of many young girls in the intervening years by “quashing” this story.

CNN, NBC, CNBC, CBS: your collective silence about a rival network spiking the story of, “…the most prolific pedophile this country has ever known” is deafening.

Parade Of The Obvious — You’re Not The Radical

The media and cavalcade of leftist organizations in the country are continually trying to tell traditional Americans that they are actually extremists. Being patriotic, believing in capitalism, thinking that men are men and not women, that there is a God and that America is an exceptional nation are among the beliefs that will get one branded as an extremist hater and dangerous.

If you’re on social media, you already understand this and how the guardians of RightSpeak will stomp you for saying the wrong thing, i.e., a man cannot be a woman.

So herewith is a quick list of truisms that are obvious, but which can get you branded in the most appalling terms.

• Obviously capitalism is the best economic system ever implemented to benefit the most people and provide the greatest freedoms. Full on socialism has caused misery, tragedy and death everywhere it is implemented. History and data is witness to this.

• Obviously racism exists. It always will because of fallen human nature. This afflicts white, black and brown people — all people on earth, or in orbit — because all people are the same in nature. And it exists in every country, always has and unfortunately always will. This is not an excuse to be racist, simply an understanding of reality.

• Obviously racial and ethnic minorities in America have equal rights with the majority, and thrive here more than any diverse country on earth. This is shown in income and freedom index data, along with population migration patterns as minorities from every corner of the world seek to immigrate to America. People try anything, legal and illegal, to get into America. Obviously we can’t be that racist.

• Obviously a man is a man and a woman is a woman. There are only two sexes and you can’t change your’s. A man merely “feeling” like a woman does not make him a woman, and vice versa. Science in the form of DNA irrefutably proclaims this. Gender dysphoria is real, but afflicts only a tiny portion of the population and even there, often works itself out by adulthood. Until a year or two ago, it was understood to be a mental disorder. And it obviously is.

• Obviously unborn human babies are human babies. Geographic location — before exiting the birth canal versus after exiting the birth canal — is not what defines a human. As humans, they should be afforded the same protections as born humans. This also is science, and not just a little common sense.

• Obviously animals are not the same as humans and do not have the same rights as humans, because humans have greater — far greater — intrinsic value than animals. Nothing excuses animal cruelty, it’s rightly illegal. And we can have strong affections for animals. But there is no equivalence in the value of life between people and animals.

• Obviously the United States is an exceptional nation. History tells us there has never been another nation created solely upon a set of ideals, opened wide for immigrants from around the world, is not defined by ethnicity or race, has liberated many countries, helped put our enemies back on their feet after defeating them through billions of dollars in aid, and has created the greatest economic and innovative engine ever known. This is an obvious exception to the rule of nations.

• And maybe ending with what should be the lead, obviously God exists because something cannot come from nothing. Nothing cannot be the cause or beginning. It must come from that which by definition always has been. The Big Bang — the beginning of all time and space, everything that is and however it functionally came about — cannot erupt from nothing. Nor can it exist within nothing. It must spring from something which is eternal, has no beginning, or definitionally, it is not the beginning. This is obvious, and also happens to be a definition of the God of the Bible.

For everyone out there who generally agrees with these obvious observations, you are not radicals or haters or racists or sexists or whatever other brickbats are thrown at you. You are mainstream Americans. Do not allow yourselves to be persuaded that your views on these things make you the extremist.

It is those who argue against these obvious truisms that are extreme.

EDITORS NOTE: This Revolutionary Act column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

The DOW’s High Record Numbers: What Does It Mean for Business Owners

The Dow Jones Industrial Average hits a record high at 182.24 points. This came after two of the world’s largest economies (U.S. and China) agreed to remove existing trade tariffs.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average, with 123 years of history, is a stock market index that measures the stock prices of the top 30 companies in the U.S. It is used by experts to assess the overall health of the stock market and the investors’ level of confidence in those companies.

The Dow average is calculated by adding all the stock prices of the companies in each index and dividing it by the number of companies.

For 2019, the top five companies that form Dow’s index are Microsoft, Apple, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Johnson & Johnson, and Walmart. Some experts still argue that the Dow is less representative of the broad stock market as it includes only 30 out of the 2,800 companies listed in the New York Stocks Exchange.

Just this year, the Dow Jones Industrial Average broke records three times. The first happened last June 11, when it hit 26,885. On July 3, The Dow hit another record, closing above 27,000. This was the time when President Trump announced that the administration would continue its negotiation with China to avert additional tariffs. And just last week, another record-breaking moment came when Dow’s numbers hit 27,492.63. This led to Dow’s year-to-date gain close to 18%.

But it’s not just the Dow that had their record-setting stock indices. Even the S&P 500 and Nasdaq Composite also finished theirs at the highest level on record.

What does it all mean for business owners?

Stock trading affects companies in a myriad of ways and plays a very important role in the U.S. economy.

Consumer Spending

First of all, trends in stocks influence consumer behavior. When stocks are high, people feel confident over their investment portfolios and feel empowered to spend money on big-ticket items like a home or a brand new car.

On the other hand, falling stock prices make people hold back on spending, especially in non-essential items. They are also more likely to tap on their emergency fund or get a personal loan to cover expenses. Reduced consumer spending has a huge effect on the business sector and obviously slows down economic growth.

Growth and Profitability

Stock trading allows businesses to raise capital for expansion, or to launch new products or pay off debts. For investors, stocks provide an opportunity to profit from gains in stock value.

Moreover, stock prices affect business and consumer behavior, which in turn, impacts the economy overall. This relationship can also be perceived from the other way around – economic conditions influence stock prices.

As a rule, the higher the stock prices, the better for companies. It also suggests a company’s ability to earn and grow its profits in the future.

Business Financing

Another major benefit of high stock prices is in equity financing. During the initial stages of their initial public offering (IPO), most companies receive an infusion of capital which they can use to acquire other companies, fund expansion, or pay off debt. Equity financing is the process of gaining capital by selling new shares. However, for a company to obtain equity financing, it needs to demonstrate a healthy share price that will attract potential investors.

Takeovers

An increase in stock prices also reduces the risk of company takeovers. When a company’s stock price falls, it’s market value goes down as well, which makes it vulnerable to takeovers. Furthermore, companies with high stock prices tend to attract media attention, which positively favors their brand reputation and attracts more potential investors.

While the stock market influences the economy, it’s not the only factor. Things like interest rates, consumer spending, and business spending also influence the economy as a whole. For example, when consumers spend less and invest less in businesses, the economy slows down. Meanwhile, falling interest rates can prompt economic growth. On top of these, fiscal policies, such as rate cuts and large budget deficits, can all impact the health of the business sector.

© All rights reserved.