Trump Impeachment: A Witchhunt…

Comment…

We’re not getting much about the impeachment on the mainstream news outlets here but the live hearings were broadcast on the BBC Parliament channel.  I watched quite a few and can see no evidence whatsoever that the President has done anything remotely wrong.  If you have evidence to the contrary, let’s hear it – share any videos, news reports, interviews etc that you think will clarify either the case for or against impeachment. 

A key question for us, however, has to be the question of a possible miscarriage of justice: is there a huge injustice being perpetrated against the U.S. President for no other reason than, as one of the politicians in the above clip admits, he has an “unorthodox” style and, as a result, is disliked?  Is that a good enough reason to sack anyone from any job – you just don’t like him/her?  Does the universal law of charity not apply to politicians?  One of the leading lights in pursuing this impeachment, remember, is Nancy Pelosi, who never misses an opportunity to tell the world that she is a Catholic (a pro-abortion-up-to-birth “Catholic”)…  

The entire impeachment saga smacks of bullying, a stitch-up,  in order to force the President out of office. 

Some would argue that the end justifies the means.  What do you think?  

66 responses

  1. It’s definitely a witchhunt, no question about it.

    I started to look at some of the videos online showing different witnesses, but witnesses to nothing at all! The whole thing is a sham – that’s clear just from the testimony I’ve seen. One of the main witnesses (ambassador to the EU, as it happens) said that when he asked the President what he wanted from the Ukraine, Mr Trump said “nothing – I want nothing”!

    Yet, the opposition is trying to say he wanted the Ukraine President to do something in the way of helping his re-election in 2020.

    It’s doesn’t stack up, since they were talking about impeaching ages ago.

    I think Mr Trump could use our prayers. God help him, at the mercy of those vicious people.

    • Lily,

      Spot on. Even when the Ukraine President said he had not been put under any pressure to investigate corruption at Burisma, the Democrates chose to interpret this as “they were put under pressure to say that”! Talk about not being able to win!

      From what I can see, there is a real injustice going on here – quite shockingly so.

  2. I agree – it’s a witchhunt. The people who lost the election that Trump won, have never accepted it just exactly the same as the remoaners who never accept the Brexit election. Well, they’ve had their wings clipped now, well and truly and I believe the same will happen when the USA election comes along next year – Trump will win again with a thumping majority and, hopefully, that will shut up the clowns who are wasting time and taxpayers’ money on this kangaroo court.

    • Nicky,

      Exactly like Brexit – the losers failing to give their consent to the result. Dreadful.

      And “kangaroo court” it is – without a shadow of a doubt.

    • Nicky,

      I agree; it is eye-opening to see the contempt which politicians (and others) have for the democracy they claim to believe in. The EU institution is an excellent example too.

      I think UK politics is edging towards the US style: remoaners & the SNP are never out of the Courts, bleating about their latest supposed injustice.

      Today I heard the SNP will consider legal action if BoJo doesn’t agree to a new referendum. It’s just ridiculous.

      • Gabriel Syme,

        Guess what? I’ve been thinking, with every news bulletin today, that the Government SHOULD grant a Section 30 order to allow a second independence referendum. I really do. Why?

        Because the majority will not vote for independence. I’m certain of it. A risk worth taking to get them out of the limelight – at least for a generation. I’ll be gone by then, so that’s fine.

        Selfish? Me? Moi? We are NOT! 😀

  3. Yes, the whole thing is a travesty, and when this fails, the Democrats, with their corrupt, arrogant, smug, bought-and-paid-for Deep State allies in the FBI, CIA, Dept. of Justice, the media, academia, and whoever controls all these strings, will come up with another set of lies to try to keep President Trump paralyzed.

    But I think any claim that this is happening because of Trump’s style, or because he is unorthodox, is just a ruse. It’s happening for several reasons:

    1. To foment distrust of our government and the electoral process among Americans. If possible, to split the country up into regions, or even start a civil war.
    2. To prevent the globalist socialist agenda from having further setbacks. That agenda includes open borders (i.e. the disappearance of national identities, the same purpose for which the EU was founded), the climate change hoax, gun control, abortion/euthanasia, LGBT-ism, etc.
    3. To cover up the actual crimes of Obama, Clinton, Biden, and their operatives in the above agencies.
    4. To punish Trump for biting the globalist hand that fed him (he was a Rockefeller protege).

    Someone recently posted on another thread that when Trump wins big next year, he thinks the Democrats will finally leave him alone. That is wishful thinking, I’m afraid. They will no more leave him alone than Satan will leave Christians alone, or that the Pharisees would leave Our Lord alone.

    This is permanent, willful malice, and we should be praying to Our Lady of Guadalupe to crush its head, create division in the camp of America’s enemies, and bring the true criminals to justice.

    And by the way, America’s enemies, currently, include Pope Francis, who has surrendered the Church to the UN agenda, which is global socialism, and which is naked evil.

    • RCA Victor,

      # 3 on your list is particularly interesting – would you elaborate on that when you find a minute? (If you find two minutes, please send one across the miles to me, moi, both of us 😀 )

      Interestingly, I found a video earlier this evening, showing a meeting of Democrat voters in a hall, all of them challenging their representative (forget his name) and shouting at him to stop the impeachment. Try as I have done, I cannot find it again or I’d post it here. Says something when the people voting for the Democrats want them to stop the witchhunt!

    • RCA Victor,

      I signed up to receive the American thinker bulletins daily – and I do, but never have the time to check them out properly. The following information jumped out at me just now –

      Not only is Democratic Rep. Jeff Van Drew not going to vote for impeachment, he’s getting ready to jump ship…

      WOW! That sounds like it will be seriously helpful to The Donald!

      • Editor,

        Hopefully he is a Pied Piper who will, unlike the story, lead his Democrat colleagues to sanity. That is, if they want to get re-elected!

  4. Trump admitted to asking the Ukraine President to investigate while he had ordered the State Department to withhold anticipated aid funding. This was demonstrated clearly during the congressional hearings in the lead up to the impeachment articles being drafted. That is called a quid pro quo and it is a form of blackmail that is illegal especially when you are using your power as President of the United States (issuing aid funding at the executive level) to achieve a personal political objective (the investigation into the Bidens). The entire idea of there being anything nefarious done by the Bidens in and around Ukraine is the stuff of internet rumours for rapid partisans who have frankly lost touch with reality. Trump directed that aid money be withheld knowing full well that Trump would be asking the President of Ukraine to investigate and that he would understand how the dark arrangement worked.

    • EJ James,

      Witness after witness, called by the Democrats, said that there was no “quid pro quo” – that Trump simply wanted the corruption on which the new President of Ukraine had stood for election (promising to deal with it!) investigated but, they said, the withholding of the military aid was not linked to that investigation. ALL of the witnesses said that, and any hint otherwise was either their own assumption, or hearsay. They also said under examination from the Republicans, that withholding aid for one reason or another is perfectly usual – nothing notable about it.

      What puzzles me about those who support impeachment, is that they don’t worry at all about Joe Biden’s corruption, the fact that his son is earning obscene amounts of money in a company, in a job for which he is not qualified at all. That doesn’t bother you? You don’t see THAT as requiring investigation? That Joe Biden used HIS position as Vice-President to line the pockets of a family member, in a corrupt company in one of, if not THE, most corrupt nation in the world? Really? You’d prefer HIM as the President after 2020, manifestly corrupt, rather than the current President who has sought to investigate that corruption?

      Strange logic; lack of morals, ethics, you name it.

      • I don’t prefer anyone as President, I am not even American. The fact you would think so black and white as to believe that if I see logic in impeachment for Trump that I must be a Democrat and Biden supporter is actually very telling.

        • No, what is very telling is that you see support for impeachment despite the fact that there isn’t a shred of evidence that would stand up in any court of law. THAT is what is very telling.

          The reference to “preferring” Joe Biden over Trump in the 2020 election is quite simply that that is the issue. The accusation is that Trump was trying to dig up dirt on Biden – his presumed opponent in the 2020 election.

          Thus, it seems to me that if I were indifferent to whoever wins the race, I would certainly NOT want a corrupt politician winning over the incumbent, even if I disliked the personality of the incumbent. Even if I didn’t like the idea that he was digging up dirt – I’d want to know if the suspicion of corruption had any truth in it… That would be MY concern. And I, too, am not American.

          Get it now?

    • I stand by what I have already posted about the Bidens: they (Joe, specifically) were the only “quid pro quo.” And by your attempt to dismiss those who point out the blatant corruption of the Bidens as “internet rumours for rapid [sic] partisans who have frankly lost touch with reality” you identify yourself as a liberal dealing in ad hominem remarks, rather than face the reality you imply you are in touch with. Oh, just another crazy conspiracy theory!

      I’ve also already recommended the American Thinker website to readers of this blog, for a strong dose of reality opposed to the “reality” promoted by shameless pathological liars like Adam Schiff, Nancy Pelosi, James Comey…not to mention Barack Hussein Obama and Hillary Clinton.

      Today, for example, a sampling of the following articles on this subject:

      1. “Adam Schiff is shameless”
      2. “Alternate realities and impeachment”
      3. “Shameless Schiff goes Sgt. Schultz”
      4. “Schiff town hall meeting in his district erupts in catcalls and chaos” (even Democrat voters, in addition to the growing number of Democrats in the House, have had enough of this charade)
      5. “Nadler panics, gets stuck in elevator as protesters shame him over impeachment” (see #4)

      Here is an excerpt from #2, which touches on your phony “quid pro quo” claim (bold emphases mine):

      “Along with finding Jesus in the impeachment of Donald J. Trump, Democrats have become obsessed with “the rule of law” as if pounding one’s fist on the desk made their demands all the more real despite their spotty record of flouting the rule of law in sanctuary cities; concocting out of whole cloth articles of impeachment that do not fall within the clear limitations set forth in the Constitution of bribery, treason, and high crimes or misdemeanors; illegally spying on the Trump campaign (wasn’t that the basis for the attempted impeachment against Nixon?); knowingly using false information in their FISA applications; and denying the President any semblance of Due Process. Although their impassioned cries might seem altruistic to a visitor from another universe, those of us who have been on Earth for the last few decades know that the “rule of law” is relative for Democrats.

      Their talk of truth is nothing short of otherworldly as they repeatedly distort the truth, in plain sight, to construct a tall tale of outrageous and dangerous impeachable conduct: lying about contact with the whistleblower, intentionally misquoting the transcript of the Zelensky call, inexplicably deleting the requirement that whistleblower complaints be based on firsthand knowledge, intentionally misquoting the transcript of the Zelensky call, and defining “us” as “me” (“I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot….”) and then backtracking and claiming “us” means “the campaign” even though it clearly implies “the country.”

        • Editor,

          I just took a brief tour of his blog. Did you notice this whopper?

          https://stoiccatholic.blog/2019/12/10/christianity-and-homosexuality/

          So much for his “journey” – even a Jesuit couldn’t do better than this twisted, anti-Christian logic. Speaking of Jesuits, he also has Pope Francis’ Twitter feed in the right column, and one from the “Archbishop” of Canterbury.

          One wonders why he has posted nary a blog word about the pathetic, anti-Christian Justin Trudeau, his Canadian Prime Minister wrapped in a rainbow flag…yet he is confident that President Trump, the most pro-life President in American history, is guilty of whatever the leftist liars claim.

          • RCA Victor,

            No, I haven’t toured that blog but, as you say, that’s a whopper. A whopper, however, which offers a major clue as to the genesis of his anti-Trump sentiments. Priceless.

            And I think it is very telling, indeed, that he says nothing about the awful Justin Time Trudeau, who looks and acts like a twelve year old, so maybe our Canadian visitor is (rightly) embarrassed by him and chose to avoid mentioning him on his blog for that reason.

            I can understand that. Sincere sympathy, E.J. James…

  5. They are actually jealous of his “unorthodox style” He speaks to the very heart of the common people. His quick wit has people laughing a clapping. His patriotism is always in view. Always the red, white and blue nearby, along with the flag pin in his lapel. I will never forget the time he stopped the reporter mid sentence and said,pointing the finger at him and shaking it …”FAKE NEWS” I laughed myself sillly along with many others.. That’s what they don’t like. He’s got the people wound around his little finger and he does it without trying. He’s a regular guy! We just love him. He came on the stage out of nowhere and he’s saving us. We must pray for him. He is a TARGET.

    • Mary Anne,

      Spot on. One man explained why he liked Trump, saying: “He says what the rest of us [ordinary people] are thinking”!

      Got it in one! The elite hate it. They are not going to give up their power to manipulate, cheat and pursue corrupt ends too easily.

        • RCA Victor,

          Highly unlikely to happen until we can see the back of Papa Francis, because without a special grace, he’s never going to consecrate Russia. We should pray hard for that grace for him, as we approach yet another year, the 103rd year since the Fatima apparitions.

  6. Am all for Nancy Pelosi as everyone on Here especially knows how good a Catholic she is and would not stoop so Low as to Publicly Lie. 🐀 This to me is what she resembles. Now I have got the Joke of the Day out I Personally Love President Donald Trump. He is of course no Saint but without a Doubt he’s hated by the Swamp. Ad like though to get your opinion on Brennan. As far I see this Traitor is worse than the Obamas. One didn’t expect much from The Obamas as they as far as am concerned Had Sold Their Souls long ago. But for Brennan to Sell His Irish Catholic Birthright for Filthy Islam is Unforgivable.

  7. I need a little comic relief from this travesty, so…

    Q: How many Democrats does it take to screw in a light bulb?

    A: No Democrat would stoop so low as to perform real labor, as they are too busy trying to screw President Trump. They would hire several illegal aliens to do it.

    • John,

      That certainly is interesting, though the connection proposed between Jacob Schiff and Adam Schiff is tenuous at best. I had forgotten all about Jacob, the man who financed most of the “revolutionaries” of the Bolshevik revolution (along with the King of Sweden I think), who were actually mercenaries trained on the Lower East Side of Manhattan by Leon Trotsky and then shipped to Russia.

      Schiff’s brokerage firm, Kuhn & Loeb, now Merrill Lynch I believe, was one of the 8 Class A stockholders of the so-called Federal Reserve Bank, which is actually a private international banker cartel. Interesting how the Wikipedia article on him leaves out some of those facts, and even laughably claims he was opposed to the Bolsheviks once they overthrew the provisional Kerensky government.

      At any rate, the modern Schiff, Adam, certainly is a traitor.

  8. I heard an interview on BBC Radio earlier when they had a democrat and a republican (instead of the usual, two democrats!) – it’s screamingly obvious that the President hasn’t committed any crime. This clip from the opening of the debate in the Senate today is interesting, quite a good summary.

    • Margaret Mary,

      Actually, President Trump did commit a crime: he was elected by the will of the people, who defied the will of the corrupt Satanists in the Deep State.

      So it will always be with socialists: claim to represent “the masses,” until the masses rise up against them. That is the import of Nancy Pelosi’s statement, quoted by Rep. Collins in this video, that the voters can’t be trusted not to re-elect Trump. She is the perfect socialist: corrupt, deranged, and a pathological liar.

      • RCA Victor,

        I was totally shocked this morning to find out that they have actually impeached the President on the most ridiculous grounds – a phone call, where he is asking the President of another country who was elected on his promise to root out corruption in that country, Ukraine, to investigate a corrupt company employing the son of an American former VP. How’s that a crime? Why are the Democrats not concerned about that corruption?

        I laughed at the clip they showed of the President at a rally calling it “impeachment lite” – he really is a character. He must be a very strong character, though, to hold fast through the persecution he has been put through since his election.

        I saw on Yahoo news this morning that the Democrats can look forward to being trounced at the next election. I sincerely hope so.

        • Lily,

          The Democrats are indeed concerned about their own corruption (e.g. Obama, Clinton, Biden et al), which is why they have gone to such great lengths to create and enforce this impeachment diversion. There are several other purposes behind this farce, but that surely is one of the primary short-term ones.

          The blogger “John” posted above a link to a very interesting article about the long-term purpose, namely, that the road to war with Russia, the goal of the NWO madmen, cannot be blocked by Trump or anyone else.

          But back to the short-term purpose:

          https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/12/secretary_hillary_clinton_and_the_deep_state_a_rico_criminal_conspiracy.html

          • RCA Victor,

            That’s a really useful article from the American Thinker, especially since it’s the first time I have seen a definition of the “deep state”. I guessed its meaning but haven’t seen it defined before, so I copied it here for others who might wonder about it:

            “A body of people, typically influential members of government agencies or the military, believed to be involved in the secret manipulation or control of government policy. ‘the deep state and its policy of allowing extremist ideologies to flourish may be the actual issues of concern’

            It’s just amazing to think there are people like than organised for the very purpose of manipulating governments. Don’t want they hate Trump because he is determined to “drain the swamp”. I hope he succeeds!

            • Fidelis,

              The term “deep state” is in itself only somewhat useful, as it tells us who the “worker bees” are (gov’t employees), but not who the Queen bee (or bees) is.

              In other words, who is pulling all the strings? Who gives the orders?

              I suppose we’ll never know, though I suspect it is various persons within the Council on Foreign Relations, the Royal Institute of International Affairs, the Bilderbergs, and the secret societies. Windswept Housegives various vague clues as to who these people might be, but it’s still guesswork. They are well-hidden.

  9. It really is a disgrace that this President has done so much for the American people and yet is now impeached along with rogues like Nixon and Clinton.

    I hope he is returned in November with a thumping majority – and I think he will be. The good news is that not all Democrats are supporting this impeachment.
    https://www.thestar.com/news/world/us/2019/10/30/house-democrat-takes-lonely-stand-as-impeachment-skeptic.html

    That’s something I’ve not seen reported in the broadcasting media here in the UK/

    • Nicky,

      That’s really good news that not all democrats voted for impeachment. That’s a well kept secret, right enough. If we didn’t have the internet, we wouldn’t know the half of what is going on.

      • Lily,

        That’s really interesting about the Democrats who are supporting Trump. Here’s a clip showing Adam Schiff’s (and other) Democrat politicians being called out, booed etc. by their own constituents, asking him to stop the impeachment and calling him a liar. Truth will always out in the end – I don’t think the President has anything to worry about when the next election come around.

        • Nicky,

          that’s fantastic – seeing that liar being booed by his own constituents, made my day, LOL!

          I found this clip from yesterday’s Fox News – the bit at the end shows that this politician is not afraid to tell the President off when need be, although he says he likes him. That’s a true friend, IMHO.

  10. I have to say, the more I’m unearthing about this impeachment process, the more I’m for Trump and I think that will be the same for the people in the USA so what’s the bet he gets even more votes when the next general election comes around. That’ll be one in the eye of Pelosi and Schiff, LOL! It’s going to be a replay of our general election!

    • Lily,

      I agree – it’s beyond belief that now the speaker Pelosi, is not taking the impeachment to the end (at least that’s how I’m interpreting things) – this quite short video conversation is very interesting:

  11. I do find it interesting the support Trump has among Evangelicals and some Catholics. He doesn’t strike me as giving obvious moral leadership, not least his boasting about sexually assaulting women by grabbing them by their genitals, and first denying and then being shown to have paid off a porn star who claimed to have sex with him shortly after his wife gave birth to their son.

    Nor, it has to be said, does his approach to refugees chime with the approach of the Catholic Church. the more so given he is a second generation immigrant, currently married to an immigrant who obtained a “genius visa” without any clear signs of being eligible.

    As for the impeachment process, the Trump defenders here seem to employ the same scattergun approach of the Republicans in Congress. Whataboutery being a key theme (Clinton, Obama, etc, etc) and of course utterly irrelevant. The line that “witness after witness” said there was no quid pro quo, ignoring many witnesses who said the exact opposite, and of course quoting a text sent after they knew they were rumbled and it may become public. Complaints about due process, when the rules were in fact set by the Republicans, the White House point blank refused to provide documents or allow witnesses to testify and Trump was invited to do so but preferred to whine about how unfair everyone is to him on Twitter.

    Although there were some moments of light relief. Such as when a group of Republicans stormed the hearings to disrupt them, when a number of those doing the storming were in fact invited and could have just opened the door, walked in and sat down.

    The usual untruths are of course being promoted, for example referring to the record of the call publicly released as being a “transcript”, which Trump has said repeatedly and is repeated again in the comments above. Of course, the very first page of what was released states very clearly that it is not a transcript. Why lie repeatedly about something so clearly falsifiable?

    Finally, the approach of the Republicans in the Senate is eye-opening, with McConnell even saying publicly that he will act in compliance with the White House, ie Trump. No attempt to even pretend to carry out his role in a trial with any kind of objectivity.

    • Andrew,

      I think you’ve been on before with your observations about Donald Trump’s morality or lack of it in terms of sexual behaviour. We’re all agreed that this is lamentable – I’m thinking of his “wives”, not the unfounded allegations against him by gold-digging females. In any event, not interested – he’s not been elected pope so really we have to place that part of his life into our charitable prayers for his full spiritual recovery, repentance and, hopefully, conversion to the Catholic religion, to ensure, assuming his repentance, the salvation of his soul. He certainly has a better grasp of Catholic social teaching than Pope Francis, frankly. Look into it. Don’t believe the biased media. Check out the American economy and see how much he has made it work for the poor.

      You talk rubbish all the way through your comment – not least about illegal immigrants. Goodness only knows what you must think of St Thomas Aquinas; here’s an article which gives the unthinking “open borders” mentality (of the US Bishops) and then goes on to compare their baloney with the Catechism of the Catholic Church and St Thomas Aquinas. http://www.ncregister.com/blog/kschiffer/what-the-bishops-the-catechism-and-st.-thomas-aquinas-say-about-immigration

      Listen, if you actually think that the “evidence” given during the impeachment process in Congress IS “evidence”, good luck to you. I watched almost the entire proceeding, either live at the time or recorded shortly thereafter, and I could not believe the nonsense of it. The fact that Superwoman Pelosi doesn’t want to proceed to the next stage, should tell you all you need to know about her “case” and if that’s not enough, then the fact that two Democrat politicians have voted against it, and one has even left the Party to join the Republicans, should at least make you wonder if you’re really getting the whole story from the BBC (actually, they stopped reporting the debacle at a relatively early stage. Eggs on faces all round). If you don’t want to do your own research, and just drink in the propaganda, go ahead. I’m afraid it makes you not, by far, the brightest button in the box.

      If you really want to know what Pelosi is about, read the following first class article – because YOU are mentioned. It’s to fool people like you that she’s “impeaching” the President (and note the author’s informative details about the way the media keeps reporting that “Trump is only the third President to be impeached” – then name Nixon and Clinton as the other two… Not the case, but I don’t want to spoil it for you…
      https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/12/pelosis_ploy.html

      Andrew, try to think independently of the last news broadcast from the BBC, ITV, Sky or… well, you’ll get it. Ever noticed that they all report exactly the same stuff, from exactly the same angle, with exactly the same conclusions? Now, I wonder just why that would be…. ?

      • Some interesting points to pick up on from your response.

        You refer to “gold-digging females” making “unfounded allegations”. You appear to know a lot more about the details, and the women involved, in order to make such a judgement. I only said a porn star had claimed to have sex with him, without rushing to judgement. Of course, there are many entirely innocent reasons for paying a not insubstantial sum of money to a porn star after getting her to sign a non-disclosure agreement, and then lying about it until it becomes public. Happens all the time, I expect.

        Other women did make allegations, much in line with what he is on record as boasting about, but unlike you I’m not in a position to come to any judgement on these.

        You claim I’m talking rubbish about illegal immigration, which is curious given I didn’t mention that subject. But refugees didn’t fit that well with what you wanted to say so probably best to deliberately misquote me.

        The question of whether there is sufficient evidence for articles of impeachment is for Congress to determine, and for the Senate to subsequently try. It seems to me clear that Trump sought to use US foreign policy to further his own political ends, which I understand is an impeachable act. No amount of whataboutery regarding Biden, Clinton, Obama, etc has any bearing on that.

        I must admit I didn’t have time to watch days and days of the proceedings, but I did read about it in some detail, from a range of sources, including Trump’s favourite media outlet, Fox.

        What struck me from what I saw was that the Republicans did an awful lot of shouting and ranting about entirely irrelevant issues, and it was difficult to find where they addressed the points in question.

        I did read the article you linked, but I’m not sure why you think it so good. Sifting through the gratuitous insults and ad hominem attacks, the only point seemed to be that there is a legal debate about whether Trump is actually impeached if the articles have not been sent to the Senate. A debate already widely known about. There is also a strange point about Nixon, at least strange if it is addressed to people with even a rudimentary knowledge of politics and history.

        I’m not sure that impeachment is the right thing to do, not least because it deflects from the huge damage Trump is doing, particularly to public education and the environment, plus the vast fiscal problem in the not too distant future from his irresponsible economic policies, notably unfunded tax cuts.

        The outcome is obvious. Not only that the Republicans currently control the Senate, but that they have said quite explicitly that they see their role as the jury in the trial (which is what it is) to find the defendant not guilty, and indeed to act in coordination with the defendant in order to achieve this.

        Given the rest of your post, it comes as no surprise that you apparently know from where I gather information on current affairs. Nor that the sources you mention are actually the ones I use least. But, of course, you have already rushed to judgement.

      • Editor,

        I suggest you are wasting your time trying to reason with this individual. He is obviously interested only in polemics and derision, not in any discussion based on facts. Polemics, derision, hair-splitting, falsehoods….ah yes, the stuff of which trolls are made.

        • RCAVictor

          Despite your clearly low opinion of me, I’m genuinely interested to understand where the features you highlight are in my posts above, and should be grateful if you could point them out.

  12. For starters Andrew many people from the media on both sides believe that Stormy Daniels testimony is nothing more than political.

    As for the economy, here is a video explaining what President Trump has done for the American people with regard to creating millions of new jobs. I once heard on the news someone saying that there are now more jobs in America than people available to fill them: https://youtu.be/lvCwMIk9D0s

    Tax cuts: https://youtu.be/wmsWlT4z5OQ

    You also mentioned Trump and his immigration policies. Watch this video and maybe you will learn something 🙂 https://youtu.be/97MvZR8KjQ4

    As to the environment: https://youtu.be/wNXq7oIRIs4

    And last but not least is Impeachment. This video will give you the clear facts:

    If you have any other questions concerning Trump you can visit the website: https://www.snowflakevictory.com/

    • Pugnacious

      To reply to your points in turn.

      I am deeply sceptical of a claim made by a porn actress to have had an affair with a President of the US. Having said that, were someone to make such a claim with respect to me, I wouldn’t consider the best way to demonstrate my innocence would be to pay her money, have her sign a non-disclosure agreement and then lie that I had done this.

      Of greater concern for me is the boasting about sexually assaulting women, which I do not regard as acceptable behaviour.

      Yes, many economic indicators for Trump are positive, albeit that many are continuation of the trends under Obama. However, the elephant in the room is the impact of his fiscal policy. As a candidate he said he would eliminate the budget deficit. Once elected, however, he made very substantial and unfunded tax cuts that benefited almost exclusively the wealthiest taxpayers and corporations, the effect of which will be a huge increase in the budget deficit. Republicans used to see themselves as fiscally responsible, but seem to have now taken a different approach.

      I mentioned Trump’s approach to refugees, not his approach to wider immigration. Perhaps you conflate these issues, but I see them as separable.

      As regards the environment, his withdrawal from the Paris Agreement (imperfect though it may be), claims that climate change science is a hoax perpetrated by China, the roll-back of environmental protection, his wilful ignorance of energy sources such as wind-power, and the promotion of fossil fuels point to a policy direction that does not indicate a serious intent to engage with environmental issues.

      As in my post above, I suspect the impeachment process serves as a useful distraction.

      And thank you for the link, although I’ve already seen that site. As Editor points out, try to think independently. I’m not convinced the best objective and factual source of information is one that declares it is “Paid for by Donald J. Trump for President, Inc.”.

  13. It’s not unusual for wealthy business men, politicians and celebrities to pay off accusers – it’s happened quite a lot and the reason given is that these are pests and it saves court time, legal fees and so on, just to shut them up with a few quid. I wouldn’t do it either, but all we’re all different. The same goes for his alleged behaviour towards women in years gone by but I think if all the politicians and celebs guilty of that were named and shamed (as he has been) we’d get quite a shock, Prince Andrew being the most recent!

    You said: “Yes, many economic indicators for Trump are positive, albeit that many are continuation of the trends under Obama”

    That’s what the Trump; critics/Obama fans say all the time to explain the upturn in the economy. I don’t buy it. Before the election which Trump won, Obama’s approval ratings were deep in the mud (which would not have been the case had he put sound economic policies in place) and, as a matter of interest, recently, at the height of the impeachment process, Trump’s approval ratings were higher than Obama’s at the same time in his presidency.

    Obama’s policies towards refugees were really much worse than you are thinking Trump’s are. In fact, when Trump separated families at the border it was to process them thoroughly – they were reunited in due course. Obama did not such thing, and his loose policy on borders meant that the USA was importing terrorists posing as refugees. It’s taken Donald Trump to restore order to the immigration/refugee processing system.

    You can dance about all you like with Trump’s economic policy but the polls are showing that the ordinary people will be voting for him again in the 2020 election – like any business man he will want to serve both the better off and the poorer in society. There’s nothing wrong with that.

    I refer now to your final paragraph. What a very strange thing to say. Where else would you go to find out factual information about anyone or any organisation? Their own website, of course! So, forgive me, but I actually did LOL at your “sucker punch” finale! After all, many of us here came onto the Catholic Truth website and blog after hearing them denounced as extremists. Where else would we have gone? To the Bishops of Scotland website? LOL!

    I note you are a believer in the climate-change caused by human beings theory. I hope you saw the expert interviewed on the news recently asked if he blamed climate change on the Australian fires. When he said “no”, they couldn’t get him off quickly enough. You do seem to go along with all the propaganda whether on Trump or the climate, but so do most people so no worries.

    My final word on Trump is this: if he was really as bad as they (his enemies) are saying, then that should be easy to prove when the next election comes around. No need for all this frantic trying to get him on this charge or that charge. It’s only because he is making a difference, is a good President, that his enemies are going crazy to get rid of him BEFORE the next election. Good luck with that, I say, LOL!

Leave a Reply to Lily Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: