The democrats have already impeached President Trump and won the 2020 election.
Silly me. Maybe not.
War is deception. Politics, being an extension of war (or vice versa), is also deception.
Most, if not all, talk show hosts; most, if not all, conservative and republic-oriented news sources continually croon that the democrats are alienating themselves from winning the impeachment and the 2020 election. Are they sure, considering that it is quite possible democrats also understand and apply these same principles? Are democrats, dishonest to the core, also capable of fronting an attack while a hidden attack is in the works? If we believe that the election hinges on voters, we are already deceived. It is my contention that there is no way democrats received anywhere near 50 percent of the American vote. It is impossible. There are two considerations in this. One is that, if hundreds, as compared to tens of thousands, magically translates to a majority in liberal fake news polls, then the opposite must be that tens of thousands in support of Trump and the Republic surely must translate to hundreds, in ratio, turning out for elections. That is impossible so the polls, the numbers must be flawed, fake. Who are liberals trying to fool?
The other consideration is the inconsistency of this magical, fantasy-land transformation. If tens of thousands translates to a slightly-less-than 50 percent count at election, then a 1/10th as many who turn out for rallies can only account for.1/10th as many at election.
I admit my speculation may not be accurate, but I ask, what other variables are in effect? When liberal “news” reports massive wins from scant support one must think they have a formula. Do they apply that formula to tens of thousands at rallies, and would that reflect, the same results? However, if that is the case, it is so inconsistent that it cannot be true, when we consider a miniscule turnout for democrat candidates translates to a majority, that too is impossible. If scores of thousands reflect to a minority in liberal fake news polls, then small a tenth out also reflect a ten of election votes. Are democrats really that out of touch? I doubt it.
Democrats must have a formula, or plan to win an election they are obviously going to lose. Looking at numbers of supporters at Trump Rallies now, compared to numbers leading up to the 2016 election, one would surely think another win for republicans and Trump. Why are democrats continue to do the same things over and over? Do they not know the the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over, and then doing it again, expecting different results is insane.
There is so much to cover I am easily distracted.
woking historically speaking, democrats, liberals and progressives have cheated numerous times in passing bills. I have maintained democrats have cheated for decades to win elections, counting surprising found ballots always when needed.
This, in and of itself is impossible. The same voter turnout at rallies always indicates and drives voter turnout at elections, as it does with democrats.
It is hard to believe democrats think the numbers of people attending President Trump rallies, compared with the attendance at any democrat party candidate rally is insignificant. I believe democrats are quite dumb, but not totally stupid.
What are the democrats covertly doing that is hidden by overt activity? What do democrats see, hear, believe or know that allows them to expect future gains and success? What do they know that we don’t?
Progressives and liberals have cheated Americans by cheating in politics. The Federal Income Tax Amendment, the 16th Amendment, was never ratified, making Federal Income Tax illegal. A government official, not unlike Schiff or Nadler making unsubstantiated announcements, Philander Knox, declared that 3/4ths of State Legislatures ratified the amendment. It is not true.
Do we actually think the democrats are simply trying, with nothing, to impeach our president?
If you are a democrat party supporter and believe the democrats have some case for impeachment, ask yourself, where is the evidence? Are you certain that someone who hears something from another qualifies as a witness? Such “witnessing” is always thrown out of court, thrown out of testimony because hearsay is not witnessing. The democrat politicians started with collusion, which is not a crime, and failed to show collusion. They switched their accusations to obstruction, back to collusion, and now they have abuse of power and disrespect for scoundrels, also known as “obstruction of congress”. Congress is not the judiciary, or judicial in the least. Obstruction of congress is basically, a non sequitur: a nothing. A simple comparison of terms shows the invalidity of “obstruction of congress”. Obstruction of justice compared to obstruction of congress is comparing apples and oranges. Obstruction of justice attaches punishment because offense against law renders others vulnerable. However, offense against congresses is not the same and does not come close to rending others vulnerable. There can be no offense against congress. It is a misnomer that cannot exist. Congress is a governing body, making laws to suit America, the country as a whole, it self. There is no law to be violated or offended.
If you, dear reader, desire to change that function and restriction of congress you would need an amendment to the constitution, just as apples are needed to make apple sauce. Do you understand the strength of this individual guarantee? It simply means one is allowed to leave prosecution of crimes to those making accusations. Those who make accusations are then required to “prove beyond a doubt”, that the accused committed said crime. What is the crime? Is it refusal to testify against one’s self? No, that is not a crime, except in tyrannies and banana republics. Judicial decisions that involve forcing citizens to testify against themselves, or for those who do not, attaching inherent guilt, is just plain evil, a crime against humanity, individual humans, particularly.
Can we apply the same parameters and/or conditions to “obstruction of congress”?
Is the judiciary a representative governing body or the judicial arm of justice? Is the judiciary political or governing in nature? It is against the law for the judiciary to operate outside of its assigned and entrenched duties. It is also against Constitutional Law for the political body to adjudicate, also outside of its assigned and entrenched duties. Congress, therefore, has not been given authority to convict or acquit. There can be no offense for obstructing a governing body from justice because the governing body does not have the authority or assignment. The congress is not judicial in nature, and is restricted by the supreme law, the Constitution, and so is the congress restricted from acting outside of it’s role and duties.
There is, however, ample reason for democrats to parade this fallacy before the public. The democrats are not trying to convince democrat party or liberal supporters that President Trump committed an impeachable offense. The democrats and liberal media have already inculcated enough hatred and rage in the ignorant democrat party support, that those who want him out, need to rational reason. The war on truth is a deception. Who are democrats trying to deceive?
Listening to mainstream media, establishment, liberal media, we consider three target groups: democrat party supporters, undecided independent voters, and republican, republic-oriented supporters ofPresident Trump.
The 1912 congressional elections produced an overwhelming democrat majority, 291 seats of 435 represents 66.9%.
Through 1913 the democrats pushed for legislation for federal income tax. Such a tax would require an Amendment to the Constitution. Such an amendment requires 3/4ths of the Senate to ratify. Prior to 1917, Senators had been appointed by State Legislatures to represent States. This opposition was designed to keep states and centralized government at odds, giving ample power to states to retain states’ rights to sovereignty over states’ responsibilities. The Constitution was designed to provide power for individuals and states to resist centralized tyranny.
On February 3, 1913, it was announced that 3/4ths states’ ratifications had been accomplished. It was not true. Progressives and liberals in all parties broke law and convention to quickly ratify. Bill Benson, in his book, “The Law That Never Was”, writes that the majority of states did not ratify or ratified the amendment illegally. This may seem to be of little consequence when considering states had every right to ratify any bill or amendment state legislatures decided. However, we must remember the processes to ratify had been established by each state to serve the public of the states in resisting centralized tyranny. Hesitation, in some cases, three readings of amendments, was required before an amendment could be voted on. The founding fathers thought one of the most heinous affronts to individual liberty was a centralized government taxation.
It would be easy for me to claim it was the democrats that cheated America on this, but more important, it was the liberals and progressives. The congress, however, a huge majority consisting o=f democrats, did pass the amendment to the Senate in a landslide vote.
The ratification of the 16th Amendment was not completed. On February 3
In 1913 the progressive income tax amendment was passed through the house of representatives. The next step in the ratification process is 3/4ths of states must ratify, to vote for it.