Impeachment: Two Ways to Go With Coup d'État 2.0
Do NOT underestimate the combined power of the Democrat Party and its Leftmedia impeachment machine.
“We should be unfaithful to ourselves if we should ever lose sight of the danger to our liberties if anything partial or extraneous should infect the purity of our free, fair, virtuous, and independent elections.” —John Adams (1797)
Last week, as I was preparing a comprehensive analysis on the threat to American Liberty posed by the Democrat Party’s latest proposal to register all firearm transactions, a much more immediate and significant threat to our Constitution emerged.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced the centerpiece of the Democrats’ 2020 presidential campaign platform, which her House and Senate colleagues can also run on — the “Impeach Trump” charade.
Make no mistake, Pelosi’s impeachment pivot is a hard extension of the previous soft coup d'etat to take down Trump, the fake Russia collusion fabrication, which fell flat after the Mueller investigation concluded.
President Trump responded to the version 2.0 coup attempt, declaring: “I am coming to the conclusion that what is taking place is not an impeachment, it is a COUP, intended to take away the Power of the People, their VOTE, their Freedoms, their Second Amendment, Religion, Military, Border Wall, and their God-given rights as a Citizen of the United States of America!”
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, a historian who chooses his words carefully, concurred: “This is not an impeachment process. This is a coup d'etat.”
Predictably, calling the Democrats’ impeachment effort what it is immediately set leftist heads aflame. But recall the words of key Demos during the impeachment of one of their own — serial liar and sexual assailant Bill Clinton.
Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), currently chairman of the House Judiciary Committee investigating Trump, insisted then that the Clinton impeachment was “a partisan coup d'etat.” Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) called it an “impeachment coup d'etat, this unapologetic disregard for the voice of the people.” In her memoirs, Hillary Clinton declared Bill’s impeachment was an “attempted Congressional coup d'etat.”
So, is this a coup d'etat? Apparently for Democrats, “It depends what your definition of ‘is’ is,” as Bill Clinton absurdly declared in his “impeachment inquiry.” As Hillary would say, “What difference does it make?”
Well, there is a difference between the impeachment of Clinton and the effort to oust Trump — and it is a very BIG difference. The Clinton impeachment was not orchestrated by government operatives at the highest levels of the FBI and CIA, attempting to depose a president. And more to the point, Richard Nixon was rightly impeached and resigned because he attempted to conceal the fact that operatives within his administration used FBI and CIA personnel to uncover what they believed were communist influencers in the Democrat Party. That was exposed with the botched attempt to steal DNC files from their office in the Watergate building – though notably Nixon was not orchestrating these tactics.
However, in the case of both the 2016 Russian collusion hoax and the current Ukraine quid pro quo hoax, Democrats are the ones using deep-state operatives within the FBI and CIA to frame a sitting president in order to obstruct his agenda, if not remove him from office. (Don’t wait on The Washington Post to devoted six months of headlines to the Democrat deep-state conspiracy.)
Let me state again – the actions of these Democrat deep-state operatives is much more serious and consequential than those which led to Richard Nixon’s impeachment. This was, in effect, a government conspiracy to overthrow the Trump administration, a coup d'etat. And Trump’s impeachment is a diversionary political tactic, which has trivialized the constitutional impeachment authority of Congress.
These serial attacks on Trump are the most egregious assaults on Rule of Law in our nation’s history. I hope Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will turn the tables on Democrats and hang them high for using FBI and CIA operatives for their political ends.
We correctly labeled the first conspiracy to overthrow the 2016 election a “coup d'etat” 18 months ago, when evidence surfaced that the FISA memo that set off the Trump investigation was engineered by deep-state operatives in the FBI and CIA.
Rinse and repeat…
They were, and still are, operating in the interest of Barack Obama and Hillary “Gutsy” Clinton, and deep-state fingerprints are all over Pelosi’s Ukrainian quid pro quo impeachment charade. Arguably, this is a subversive “coup d'etat.”
Actually, what Pelosi announced on 24 September was the first salvo in what will be a deliberately drawn-out political saga, a theatrical sequel that picks up where their last hoax left off. At some point in this secretive and ill-defined process, she’ll call for a vote to officially inquire about what Democrats erroneously claim are impeachable offenses, but she must weigh the consequences for the 31 House Democrats holding seats in districts Trump won in 2016.
In an official letter to House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy announcing her intentions, Pelosi laughably cites her “solemn oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic,” and insisted, “Our Founders were specifically intent on ensuring that foreign entities did not undermine the integrity of our elections.” As if her reference “to support and defend” our Constitution weren’t enough of an eye-roller, she concludes, “We hope you and other Republicans share our commitment to following the facts, upholding the Constitution, protecting our national security, and defending the integrity of our elections at such a serious moment in our nation’s history.”
Ah, yes, Democrat commitment to “upholding the Constitution.” Kind of brings a tear to my eye.
This time around, House Demos are hoping to indict President Trump for “high crimes and misdemeanors,” and they’re doing so in a way that shields their process from public scrutiny while protecting their members — especially those from swing districts that Trump carried in 2016 — from public accountability. So, not only is this a constitutionally dubious process, it’s also a cowardly one.
As you know, Article I, Section 2, Clause 5 of our Constitution stipulates: “The House of Representatives … shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.” Article I, Section 3, Clauses 6 and 7 stipulates, “The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.”
Pelosi will eventually have her inquiry vote, though she claims, “There is no requirement that there be a full House vote.” But without the full House vote, her ranking members of committees are not able to issue subpoenas in connection with that inquiry.
Democrat House support for the inquiry now stands at 225, and Pelosi has asserted they will have a vote in November. (By way of comparison, the 1974 House inquiry vote to investigate Richard Nixon was for 410 to 4. The 1998 vote to investigate Clinton was 258 to 176.) Recall that even before Mueller had dropped his nothing-burger report, a House procedural vote garnered 70 Democrat for impeachment.
When she is ready, Pelosi will also get the required House Intelligence Committee vote from Chairman Adam Schiff, and a referral vote from Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, depending on where she and Sen. Chuck Schumer want to take it. Notably however, there is already one stumbling block. Schiff used intermediaries to collude with the so-called “whistleblower” on the report weeks before the Trump/Ukraine complaint was filed – and lied repeatedly about knowing about the report in advance.
(Notably, regarding the so-called “whistleblower,” The Patriot is one of very few frontline conservative organizations to call the Democrat Party’s collaboration with deep-state bureaucrats to undermine and overthrow the election of Donald Trump, what it is. We have been deliberate and mindful in calling their actions a “Coup d'Etat.” As a matter of fact, the lawyer collaborating with the so-called whistler, Mark Zaid, also called it what it was and remains, days after President Trump took office. After Trump fired Obama holdover, Acting Attorney General Sally Yates, Zaid declared on his social media account, “#coup has started. First of many steps. #rebellion. #impeachment will follow ultimately.” When Yates replacement was named, Zaid again declared, “#coup has started. As one falls, two more will take their place. #rebellion #impeachment.” He followed that with: “Johnson (1868), Nixon (1973), Clinton (1998) impeachment hearings. Next up @realDonaldTrump (2017).” And on Watergate he insisted: “45 years from now we might be recalling stories regarding the impeachment of @realDonaldTrump. I’ll be old, but will be worth the wait.” Asserting, “Since Jan 20th, I would much rather be in Canada,” he added, “It’s very scary. We will get rid of [Trump], and this country is strong enough to survive even him and his supporters. We have to.” And remarkably, he declared, “I predict @CNN will play a key role in @realDonaldTrump not finishing out his full term as president.” CNN has already played a significant role, but recall that just 20 minutes after Trump was sworn in as America’s 45th President, The Washington Post posted this headline on its website: “The campaign to impeach President Trump has begun.”)
Intelligence Community IG, Michael Atkinson, testified to Congress that the CIA complainant did not disclose to his office that he had previous contact with Schiff’s committee. He also noted the complainant is a Democrat with ties to a high-profile 2020 Democrat candidate. Atkinson said that there are serious questions about how Schiff had access to the substance of the complaint before it was released. House Republican Leader McCarthy, in a formal request to Atkinson, has demanded answers as to how Adam Schiff gained advance access to the CIA complaint before it was released.
That notwithstanding, Democrats will take the impeachment one of two directions, depending on the prevailing winds.
First option: If Pelosi and Schumer believe voter sentiments for impeachment will stall in the coming months, then they will retain the whole affair in the House, keeping the threat of impeachment hovering over Trump’s head with endless investigations by Schiff and Nadler, until the American people can finally cast their votes on Tuesday, November 3, 2020.
Second option: If they believe voter sentiments will continue to grow in favor of impeachment, then Pelosi will eventually call for a vote to refer Trump for trial in the Republican-held Senate, where she and Schumer calculate it will give Democrats a chance to retake control of the Senate in 2020 by blaming Republicans for not helping them reach the requisite two-thirds of the Senate to convict and remove President Trump from office.
By way of assessing what direction they will go, if you believe all the pontifications about an upcoming electoral backlash against the Democrats similar to the one that met Republicans following the Clinton impeachment, I urge you to heed this warning: Do NOT underestimate the combined power of the Democrat Party and its Leftmedia propaganda machine to accomplish their common political goals with this impeachment charade. If the most recent evidence of how quickly their Leftmedia outlets can turn voter sentiments in favor of impeachment is any indication, a House indictment may actually make it to the Senate for trial.
In August, 35% of Americans supported impeachment. Within days of Pelosi’s announcement and the supporting Leftmedia deluge that followed, support for impeachment jumped to 43%. This week, that support is about evenly split — 50-50. While I expect that to drop off once the Trump administration begins its challenge to Round Two of the Pelosi/Schumer ruse to obstruct his MAGA agenda, the outcome of the Clinton impeachment is not a predictor for next year’s electoral outcome.
As for their current charade, in effect, impeaching the 2016 election results was always the fallback plan if the Democrats’ “collusion delusion” failed — which it decidedly did.
If it’s not abundantly clear that the Democrats’ motivation for impeachment — undoing a national election — is based not on principle but on hatred, vengeance, and an insatiable lust for power, consider these additional Demo observations from Clinton’s 1998 impeachment.
According to Rep. Nancy Pelosi: “The Republican majority is not judging the president with fairness but impeaching him with a vengeance. In the investigation of the president, fundamental principles which Americans hold dear, fairness, privacy, checks and balances, have been seriously violated. We are here today because the Republicans in the House are paralyzed with hatred of President Clinton. And until the Republicans free themselves of this hatred, our country will suffer.”
And here’s Rep. Jerry Nadler: “The impeachment of a president is an undoing of a national election. And one of the reasons we all feel so angry about what they are doing is that they are ripping asunder our votes. They are telling us that our votes don’t count.”
Oh, and Joe Biden warned that the impeachment was just “partisan attacks on the president, charged with animosity.”
So, based on their own words, we can conclude that the “partisan” Democrat majority in the House is driven by “vengeance” rather than “fairness,” that they’re “paralyzed with hatred” of President Trump, and that they’re committed to the “undoing of a national election” while “telling us that our votes don’t count.”
If you have any remaining question about their motivation for impeachment, longtime leftist pundit Michael Kinsley once famously observed, “A gaffe is when a politician tells the truth — some obvious truth he isn’t supposed to say.”
To that end, Rep. Al Green (D-TX) inadvertently told the truth about his party’s impeachment motivations. When asked if he was afraid that talk of impeachment “will help the president’s reelection,” he responded, “I’m concerned that if we don’t impeach this president, he will get reelected.”
And there you have it. This is a theatrical farce to reduce support for Trump’s reelection.
We know that Obama/Clinton deep-state operatives, in coordination with John Brennan at the CIA and James Comey at the FBI, orchestrated the first coup d'etat to overthrow the 2016 election results. Later this month, Inspector General Michael Horowitz will likely expose their co-conspirators with in his second report on the Russia collusion hoax and the politically-motivated FISA warrant which set off the whole investigation.
The current impeachment setup is based on the same corrupt deep-state operative model, but exposing this ruse may not be sufficient to overcome public opinion against Trump, driven by the deluge of Demo/MSM drama. For his part, President Trump has appropriately “declined” the Democrats’ invitation to participate in their impeachment hoax.
The template for the Demo/Leftmedia impeachment charade will follow the hatchet job they used when trying to block the SCOTUS nomination of Brett Kavanaugh. Get ready for the faux Blasey-Ford/Swetnick bombshells!
And a warning: Reiterating a point which I first asserted in December of last year – Democrats are hoping for a one-two punch with impeachment proceedings. Knowing that Trump’s strongest re-election platform is the economy, Demos want a recession. If impeachment proceedings make it to the Senate, batten down the hatches!
Finally, amid all the din, if you missed our other key coverage this week, here are my top five picks:
Democrat Obstruction 2.0: Impeachment Game On! – Pelosi has launched the impeachment inquiry — Phase 2 of the Demos’ effort to deny Trump the presidency.
The Real Whistleblower – Donald Trump is under attack for blowing the whistle on DC’s corrupt politics.
About the Altered Whistleblower Reporting Form – Who altered the CIA complaint form, and when?
Schiff’s BIG Timeline Lie Has Hit the Fan – Schiff used intermediaries to collude with the CIA whistleblower before the Trump/Ukraine complaint was filed.
Clinton: Trump Is ‘An Illegitimate President’ – Clinton declares that Trump defeated her because of “funny things that happened.”
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis
Pro Deo et Libertate — 1776