MITCH MCCONNELL IS DAMN GOOD: TAKES NANCY PELOSI TO THE WOODSHED.

‘Over the last 12 weeks, House Democrats have conducted the most rushed, least thorough, and most unfair impeachment inquiry in modern history. Now their slapdash process has concluded in the first purely partisan presidential impeachment since the wake of the Civil War. The opposition to impeachment was bipartisan. Only one part of one faction wanted this outcome. 

The House’s conduct risks deeply damaging the institutions of American government. This particular House of Representatives has let its partisan rage at this particular President create a toxic new precedent that will echo into the future.‘That’s what I want to discuss now: The historic degree to which House Democrats have failed to do their duty — and what it will mean for the Senate to do ours.‘Let’s start at the beginning. Let’s start with the fact that Washington Democrats made up their minds to impeach President Trump since before he was even inaugurated. 

Here’s a reporter in April 2016. Quote, “Donald Trump isn’t even the Republican nominee yet… [but] ‘Impeachment’ is already on the lips of pundits, newspaper editorials, constitutional scholars, and even a few members of Congress. On Inauguration Day 2017, this headline in the Washington Post: The campaign to impeach President Trump has begun.” That was day one.‘In April 2017, three months into the presidency, a senior House Democrat said “I’m going to fight every day until he’s impeached.” That was three months in.‘In December 2017, two years ago, Congressman Jerry Nadler was openly campaigning to be ranking member on House Judiciary specifically because he was an expert on impeachment.‘This week wasn’t even the first time House Democrats have introduced articles of impeachment. It was the seventh time. 

They started less than six months after the president was sworn in.‘They tried to impeach President Trump for being impolite to the press… For being mean to professional athletes… For changing President Obama’s policy on transgender people in the military.‘All of these things were “high crimes and misdemeanors” according to Democrats.‘This wasn’t just a few people. Scores of Democrats voted to move forward with impeachment on three of those prior occasions. So let’s be clear. The House’s vote yesterday was not some neutral judgment that Democrats came to reluctantly. It was the pre-determined end of a partisan crusade that began before President Trump was even nominated, let alone sworn in. 

For the very first time in modern history we have seen a political faction in Congress promise from the moment a presidential election ended that they would find some way to overturn it.‘A few months ago, Democrats’ three-year-long impeachment in search of articles found its way to the subject of Ukraine. And House Democrats embarked on the most rushed, least thorough, and most unfair impeachment inquiry in modern history.‘Chairman Schiff’s inquiry was poisoned by partisanship from the outset. Its procedures and parameters were unfair in unprecedented ways. Democrats tried to make Chairman Schiff into a de facto Special Prosecutor, notwithstanding the fact that he is a partisan member of Congress who’d already engaged in strange and biased behavior. 

He scrapped precedent to cut the Republican minority out of the process. He denied President Trump the same sorts of procedural rights that Houses of both parties had provided to past presidents of both parties.‘President Trump’s counsel could not participate in Chairman Schiff’s hearings, present evidence, or cross-examine witnesses. The House Judiciary Committee’s crack at this was even more ahistorical. It was like the Speaker called up Chairman Nadler and ordered one impeachment, rush delivery please.‘That Committee found no facts of its own and did nothing to verify the Schiff report. Their only witnesses were liberal law professors and congressional staffers. 

There’s a reason the impeachment inquiry that led to President Nixon’s resignation required about 14 months of hearings. 14 months. In addition to a special prosecutor’s investigation.‘With President Clinton, the independent counsel’s inquiry had been underway for years before the House Judiciary Committee dug in. Mountains of evidence. Mountains of testimony from firsthand fact witnesses. Serious legal battles to get what was necessary.‘This time around, House Democrats skipped all of that and spent just 12 weeks.‘More than a year of hearings for Nixon… multiple years of investigation for Clinton… and they’ve impeached President Trump in 12 weeks. So let’s talk about what the House actually produced in those 12 weeks.‘House Democrats’ rushed and rigged inquiry yielded two articles of impeachment. 

They are fundamentally unlike any articles that any prior House of Representatives has ever passed.‘The first article concerns the core events which House Democrats claim are impeachable — the timing of aid to Ukraine.‘But it does not even purport to allege any actual crime. Instead, they deploy this vague phrase, “abuse of power,” to impugn the president’s actions in a general, indeterminate way.‘Speaker Pelosi’s House just gave into a temptation that every other House in history had managed to resist: They impeached a president whom they do not even allege has committed an actual crime known to our laws. They impeached simply because they disagree with a presidential act and question the motive behind it. 

Look at history. The Andrew Johnson impeachment revolved around a clear violation of a criminal statute, albeit an unconstitutional one. Nixon had obstruction of justice — a felony under our laws. Clinton had perjury — also a felony.‘Now, the Constitution does not say the House can impeach only those presidents who violate a law.‘But history matters. Precedent matters. And there were important reasons why every previous House of Representatives in American history restrained itself from crossing this Rubicon.‘The framers of our Constitution very specifically discussed whether the House should be able to impeach presidents just for “maladministration”— in other words, because the House simply thought the president had bad judgment or was doing a bad job. 

The written records of the founders’ debates show they specifically rejected this. They realized it would create total dysfunction to set the bar for impeachment that low.‘James Madison himself explained that allowing impeachment on that basis would mean the President serves at the pleasure of the Congress instead of the pleasure of the American people.‘It would make the President a creature of Congress, not the head of a separate and equal branch. So there were powerful reasons why Congress after Congress for 230 years required presidential impeachments to revolve around clear, recognizable crimes, even though that was not a strict limitation. 

Powerful reasons why, for 230 years, no House opened the Pandora’s box of subjective, political impeachments.‘That 230-year tradition died last night.‘Now, House Democrats have tried to say they had to impeach President Trump on this historically thin and subjective basis because the White House challenged their requests for more witnesses.‘And that brings us to the second article of impeachment. The House titled this one “obstruction of Congress.” What it really does is impeach the president for asserting presidential privilege. The concept of executive privilege is another two-century-old constitutional tradition. Presidents starting with George Washington have invoked it. Federal courts have repeatedly affirmed it as a legitimate constitutional power. 

House Democrats requested extraordinary amounts of sensitive information from President Trump’s White House — exactly the kinds of things over which presidents of both parties have asserted privilege in the past.‘Predictably, and appropriately, President Trump did not simply roll over. He defended the constitutional authority of his office. It is not a constitutional crisis for a House to want more information than a president wants to give up. It is a routine occurrence. The separation of powers is messy by design. Here’s what should happen next: Either the President and Congress negotiate a settlement, or the third branch of government, the judiciary, addresses the dispute between the other two. 

The Nixon impeachment featured disagreements over presidential privilege — so they went to the courts. The Clinton impeachment featured disagreements over presidential privilege — so they went to the courts.mThis takes time. It’s inconvenient. That’s actually the point. Due process is not meant to maximize the convenience of the prosecutor. It is meant to protect the accused. But this time was different. Remember: 14 months of hearings for Richard Nixon… years of investigation for Bill Clinton… but 12 weeks for President Trump.‘Democrats didn’t have to rush this. But they chose to stick to their political timetable at the expense of pursuing more evidence through proper legal channels. 

Nobody made Chairman Schiff do this. He chose to.‘The Tuesday before last, on live television, Adam Schiff explained to the entire country that if House Democrats had let the justice system follow its normal course, they might not have gotten to impeach the president in time for the election!‘In Nixon, the courts were allowed to do their work. In Clinton, the courts were allowed to do their work. Only these House Democrats decided due process is too much work and they’d rather impeach with no proof.And, they tried to cover for their own partisan impatience by pretending that the routine occurrence of a president exerting constitutional privilege is itself a second impeachable offense. 

The following is something that Adam Schiff literally said in early October. Here’s what he said: “Any action… that forces us to litigate, or have to consider litigation, will be considered further evidence of obstruction of justice.”‘Here is what the Chairman effectively said, and what one of his committee members restated just this week: If the President asserts his constitutional rights, it’s that much more evidence he is guilty.‘That kind of bullying is antithetical to American justice.‘So those are House Democrats’ two articles of impeachment. That’s all their rushed and rigged inquiry could generate: An act that the House does not even allege is criminal; and a nonsensical claim that exercising a legitimate presidential power is somehow an impeachable offense. 

This is by far the thinnest basis for any House-passed presidential impeachment in American history. The thinnest and the weakest — and nothing else comes even close.‘And candidly, I don’t think I am the only person around here who realizes this. Even before the House voted yesterday, Democrats had already started to signal uneasiness with its end product.‘Before the articles even passed, the Senate Democratic Leader went on television to demand that this body re-do House Democrats’ homework for them. That the Senate should supplement Chairman Schiff’s sloppy work so it is more persuasive than Chairman Schiff himself bothered to make it. 

Of course, every such demand simply confirms that House Democrats have rushed forward with a case that is much too weak.‘Back in June, Speaker Pelosi promised the House would, quote, “build an ironclad case.” Never mind that she was basically promising impeachment months before the Ukraine events, but that’s a separate matter.‘She promised “an ironclad case.”‘And in March, Speaker Pelosi said this: “Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country.” End quote. By the Speaker’s own standards, she has failed the country. This case is not compelling, not overwhelming, and as a result, not bipartisan. 

This failure was made clear to everyone earlier this week, when Senator Schumer began searching for ways the Senate could step out of our proper role and try to fix House Democrats’ failures for them.‘And it was made even more clear last night, when Speaker Pelosi suggested that House Democrats may be too afraid to even transmit their work product to the Senate.‘The prosecutors are getting cold feet in front of the entire country and second-guessing whether they even want to go to trial.‘They said impeachment was so urgent that it could not even wait for due process but now they’re content to sit on their hands. It is comical.‘Democrats’ own actions concede that their allegations are unproven.‘But the articles aren’t just unproven. 

They’re also constitutionally incoherent. Frankly, if either of these articles is blessed by the Senate, we could easily see the impeachment of every future president of either party.‘Let me say that again: If the Senate blesses this historically low bar, we will invite the impeachment of every future president.‘The House Democrats’ allegations, as presented, are incompatible with our constitutional order. They are unlike anything that has ever been seen in 230 years of this Republic.‘House Democrats want to create new rules for this president because they feel uniquely enraged. But long after the partisan fever of this moment has broken, the institutional damage will remain.‘I’ve described the threat to the presidency. 

But this also imperils the Senate itself.‘The House has created an unfair, unfinished product that looks nothing like any impeachment inquiry in American history. And if the Speaker ever gets her house in order, that mess will be dumped on the Senate’s lap.‘If the Senate blesses this slapdash impeachment… if we say that from now on, this is enough… then we will invite an endless parade of impeachment trials.‘Future Houses of either party will feel free to toss up a “jump ball” every time they feel angry. Free to swamp the Senate with trial after trial, no matter how baseless the charges.‘We would be giving future Houses of either party unbelievable new power to paralyze the Senate at their whim.‘More thin arguments. 

More incomplete evidence. More partisan impeachments.In fact, this same House of Representatives has already indicated that they themselves may not be done impeaching!‘The House Judiciary Committee told a federal court this week that it will continue its impeachment investigation even after voting on these articles. And multiple Democratic members have already called publicly for more.‘If the Senate blesses this, if the nation accepts it, presidential impeachments may cease being once-in-a-generation events and become a constant part of the political background noise.‘This extraordinary tool of last resort may become just another part of the arms race of polarization. 

Real statesmen would have recognized, no matter their view of this president, that trying to remove him on this thin and partisan basis could unsettle the foundations of our Republic.‘Real statesmen would have recognized, no matter how much partisan animosity might be coursing through their veins, that cheapening the impeachment process was not the answer.‘Historians will regard this as a great irony of this era: That so many who professed such concern for our norms and traditions themselves proved willing to trample our constitutional order to get their way. 

It is long past time for Washington D.C. to get a little perspective.‘President Trump is not the first president with a populist streak…Not the first to make entrenched elites uncomfortable. He’s certainly not the first president to speak bluntly… to mistrust the administrative state… or to rankle unelected bureaucrats.‘And Heaven knows he is not our first president to assert the constitutional privileges of his office rather than roll over when Congress demands unlimited sensitive information.‘None of these things is unprecedented. 

I’ll tell you what would be unprecedented. It will be an unprecedented constitutional crisis if the Senate hands the House of Representatives a new, partisan “vote of no confidence” that the founders intentionally withheld, destroying the independence of the presidency.‘It will be unprecedented if we agree that any future House that dislikes any future president can rush through an unfair inquiry, skip the legal system, and paralyze the Senate with a trial. The House could do that at will under this precedent.‘It will be unprecedented if the Senate says secondhand and thirdhand testimony from unelected civil servants is enough to overturn the people’s vote.‘It will be an unprecedented constitutional crisis if the Senate agrees to set the bar this low — forever.‘It is clear what this moment requires. It requires the Senate to fulfill our founding purpose. 

The framers built the Senate to provide stability. To take the long view for our Republic. To safeguard institutions from the momentary hysteria that sometimes consumes our politics. To keep partisan passions from boiling over.‘The Senate exists for moments like this.‘That’s why this body has the ultimate say in impeachments.‘The framers knew the House would be too vulnerable to transient passions and violent factionalism. They needed a body that could consider legal questions about what has been proven and political questions about what the common good of our nation requires.‘Hamilton said explicitly in Federalist 65 that impeachment involves not just legal questions, but inherently political judgments about what outcome best serves the nation. 

The House can’t do both. The courts can’t do both.‘This is as grave an assignment as the Constitution gives to any branch of government, and the framers knew only the Senate could handle it. Well, the moment the framers feared has arrived.‘A political faction in the lower chamber have succumbed to partisan rage. They have fulfilled Hamilton’s prophesy that impeachment will, quote, “connect itself with the pre-existing factions… enlist all their animosities… [and] there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.” End quote.‘That is what happened in the House last night. The vote did not reflect what had been proven. It only reflects how they feel about the President. 

The Senate must put this right. We must rise to the occasion.‘There is only one outcome that is suited to the paucity of evidence, the failed inquiry, the slapdash case.‘Only one outcome suited to the fact that the accusations themselves are constitutionally incoherent.‘Only one outcome that will preserve core precedents rather than smash them into bits in a fit of partisan rage because one party still cannot accept the American people’s choice in 2016.‘It could not be clearer which outcome would serve the stabilizing, institution-preserving, fever-breaking role for which the United States Senate was created… and which outcome would betray it.‘The Senate’s duty is clear. The Senate’s duty is clear.‘When the time comes, we must fulfill it.’

FROM THE PRESIDENT: A LETTER TO MADAM SPEAKER NANCY PELOSI

Dear Madam Speaker:

I write to express my strongest and most powerful protest against the partisan impeachment crusade being pursued by the Democrats in the House of Representatives.  This impeachment represents an unprecedented and unconstitutional abuse of power by Democrat Lawmakers, unequaled in nearly two and a half centuries of American legislative history.

The Articles of Impeachment introduced by the House Judiciary Committee are not recognizable under any standard of Constitutional theory, interpretation, or jurisprudence.  They include no crimes, no misdemeanors, and no offenses whatsoever.  You have cheapened the importance of the very ugly word, impeachment!

By proceeding with your invalid impeachment, you are violating your oaths of office, you are breaking your allegiance to the Constitution, and you are declaring open war on American Democracy.  You dare to invoke the Founding Fathers in pursuit of this election-nullification scheme—yet your spiteful actions display unfettered contempt for America’s founding and your egregious conduct threatens to destroy that which our Founders pledged their very lives to build.  Even worse than offending the Founding Fathers, you are offending Americans of faith by continually saying “I pray for the President,” when you know this statement is not true, unless it is meant in a negative sense.  It is a terrible thing you are doing, but you will have to live with it, not I!

Your first claim, “Abuse of Power,” is a completely disingenuous, meritless, and baseless invention of your imagination.  You know that I had a totally innocent conversation with the President of Ukraine.  I then had a second conversation that has been misquoted, mischaracterized, and fraudulently misrepresented.  Fortunately, there was a transcript of the conversation taken, and you know from the transcript (which was immediately made available) that the paragraph in question was perfect.  I said to President Zelensky:  “I would like you to do us a favor, though, because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it.”  I said do us a favor, not me, and our country, not a campaign.  I then mentioned the Attorney General of the United States.  Every time I talk with a foreign leader, I put America’s interests first, just as I did with President Zelensky.

You are turning a policy disagreement between two branches of government into an impeachable offense—it is no more legitimate than the Executive Branch charging members of Congress with crimes for the lawful exercise of legislative power.

You know full well that Vice President Biden used his office and $1 billion dollars of U.S. aid money to coerce Ukraine into firing the prosecutor who was digging into the company paying his son millions of dollars.  You know this because Biden bragged about it on video.  Biden openly stated:  “I said, ‘I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars’…I looked at them and said: ‘I’m leaving in six hours.  If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.’  Well, son of a bitch.  He got fired.”  Even Joe Biden admitted just days ago in an interview with NPR that it “looked bad.”  Now you are trying to impeach me by falsely accusing me of doing what Joe Biden has admitted he actually did.

President Zelensky has repeatedly declared that I did nothing wrong, and that there was No Pressure.  He further emphasized that it was a “good phone call,” that “I don’t feel pressure,” and explicitly stressed that “nobody pushed me.”  The Ukrainian Foreign Minister stated very clearly:  “I have never seen a direct link between investigations and security assistance.”  He also said there was “No Pressure.”   Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, a supporter of Ukraine who met privately with President Zelensky, has said: “At no time during this meeting…was there any mention by Zelensky or any Ukrainian that they were feeling pressure to do anything in return for the military aid.”  Many meetings have been held between representatives of Ukraine and our country.  Never once did Ukraine complain about pressure being applied—not once!  Ambassador Sondland testified that I told him: “No quid pro quo.  I want nothing.  I want nothing.  I want President Zelensky to do the right thing, do what he ran on.”

The second claim, so-called “Obstruction of Congress,” is preposterous and dangerous.  House Democrats are trying to impeach the duly elected President of the United States for asserting Constitutionally based privileges that have been asserted on a bipartisan basis by administrations of both political parties throughout our Nation’s history.  Under that standard, every American president would have been impeached many times over.  As liberal law professor Jonathan Turley warned when addressing Congressional Democrats: “I can’t emphasize this enough…if you impeach a president, if you make a high crime and misdemeanor out of going to the courts, it is an abuse of power.  It’s your abuse of power.  You’re doing precisely what you’re criticizing the President for doing.”

Everyone, you included, knows what is really happening.  Your chosen candidate lost the election in 2016, in an Electoral College landslide (306-227), and you and your party have never recovered from this defeat.  You have developed a full-fledged case of what many in the media call Trump Derangement Syndrome and sadly, you will never get over it!  You are unwilling and unable to accept the verdict issued at the ballot box during the great Election of 2016.  So you have spent three straight years attempting to overturn the will of the American people and nullify their votes.  You view democracy as your enemy!

Speaker Pelosi, you admitted just last week at a public forum that your party’s impeachment effort has been going on for “two and a half years,” long before you ever heard about a phone call with Ukraine.  Nineteen minutes after I took the oath of office, the Washington Post published a story headlined, “The Campaign to Impeach President Trump Has Begun.”  Less than three months after my inauguration, Representative Maxine Waters stated, “I’m going to fight every day until he’s impeached.”  House Democrats introduced the first impeachment resolution against me within months of my inauguration, for what will be regarded as one of our country’s best decisions, the firing of James Comey (see Inspector General Reports)—who the world now knows is one of the dirtiest cops our Nation has ever seen.  A ranting and raving Congresswoman, Rashida Tlaib, declared just hours after she was sworn into office, “We’re gonna go in there and we’re gonna impeach the motherf****r.”  Representative Al Green said in May, “I’m concerned that if we don’t impeach this president, he will get re-elected.”  Again, you and your allies said, and did, all of these things long before you ever heard of President Zelensky or anything related to Ukraine.  As you know very well, this impeachment drive has nothing to do with Ukraine, or the totally appropriate conversation I had with its new president.  It only has to do with your attempt to undo the election of 2016 and steal the election of 2020!

Congressman Adam Schiff cheated and lied all the way up to the present day, even going so far as to fraudulently make up, out of thin air, my conversation with President Zelensky of Ukraine and read this fantasy language to Congress as though it were said by me.  His shameless lies and deceptions, dating all the way back to the Russia Hoax, is one of the main reasons we are here today.

You and your party are desperate to distract from America’s extraordinary economy, incredible jobs boom, record stock market, soaring confidence, and flourishing citizens.  Your party simply cannot compete with our record: 7 million new jobs; the lowest-ever unemployment for African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Asian Americans; a rebuilt military; a completely reformed VA with Choice and Accountability for our great veterans; more than 170 new federal judges and two Supreme Court Justices; historic tax and regulation cuts; the elimination of the individual mandate; the first decline in prescription drug prices in half a century; the first new branch of the United States Military since 1947, the Space Force; strong protection of the Second Amendment; criminal justice reform; a defeated ISIS caliphate and the killing of the world’s number one terrorist leader, al-Baghdadi; the replacement of the disastrous NAFTA trade deal with the wonderful USMCA (Mexico and Canada); a breakthrough Phase One trade deal with China; massive new trade deals with Japan and South Korea; withdrawal from the terrible Iran Nuclear Deal; cancellation of the unfair and costly Paris Climate Accord; becoming the world’s top energy producer; recognition of Israel’s capital, opening the American Embassy in Jerusalem, and recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights; a colossal reduction in illegal border crossings, the ending of Catch-and-Release, and the building of the Southern Border Wall—and that is just the beginning, there is so much more.  You cannot defend your extreme policies—open borders, mass migration, high crime, crippling taxes, socialized healthcare, destruction of American energy, late-term taxpayer-funded abortion, elimination of the Second Amendment, radical far-left theories of law and justice, and constant partisan obstruction of both common sense and common good.

There is nothing I would rather do than stop referring to your party as the Do-Nothing Democrats.  Unfortunately, I don’t know that you will ever give me a chance to do so.

After three years of unfair and unwarranted investigations, 45 million dollars spent, 18 angry Democrat prosecutors, the entire force of the FBI, headed by leadership now proven to be totally incompetent and corrupt, you have found NOTHING!  Few people in high position could have endured or passed this test.  You do not know, nor do you care, the great damage and hurt you have inflicted upon wonderful and loving members of my family.  You conducted a fake investigation upon the democratically elected President of the United States, and you are doing it yet again.

There are not many people who could have taken the punishment inflicted during this period of time, and yet done so much for the success of America and its citizens.  But instead of putting our country first, you have decided to disgrace our country still further.  You completely failed with the Mueller report because there was nothing to find, so you decided to take the next hoax that came along, the phone call with Ukraine—even though it was a perfect call.  And by the way, when I speak to foreign countries, there are many people, with permission, listening to the call on both sides of the conversation.

You are the ones interfering in America’s elections.  You are the ones subverting America’s Democracy.  You are the ones Obstructing Justice.  You are the ones bringing pain and suffering to our Republic for your own selfish personal, political, and partisan gain.

Before the Impeachment Hoax, it was the Russian Witch Hunt.  Against all evidence, and regardless of the truth, you and your deputies claimed that my campaign colluded with the Russians—a grave, malicious, and slanderous lie, a falsehood like no other.  You forced our Nation through turmoil and torment over a wholly fabricated story, illegally purchased from a foreign spy by Hillary Clinton and the DNC in order to assault our democracy.  Yet, when the monstrous lie was debunked and this Democrat conspiracy dissolved into dust, you did not apologize.  You did not recant.  You did not ask to be forgiven.  You showed no remorse, no capacity for self-reflection.  Instead, you pursued your next libelous and vicious crusade—you engineered an attempt to frame and defame an innocent person.  All of this was motivated by personal political calculation.  Your Speakership and your party are held hostage by your most deranged and radical representatives of the far left.  Each one of your members lives in fear of a socialist primary challenger—this is what is driving impeachment.  Look at Congressman Nadler’s challenger.  Look at yourself and others.  Do not take our country down with your party.

If you truly cared about freedom and liberty for our Nation, then you would be devoting your vast investigative resources to exposing the full truth concerning the FBI’s horrifying abuses of power before, during, and after the 2016 election—including the use of spies against my campaign, the submission of false evidence to a FISA court, and the concealment of exculpatory evidence in order to frame the innocent.  The FBI has great and honorable people, but the leadership was inept and corrupt.  I would think that you would personally be appalled by these revelations, because in your press conference the day you announced impeachment, you tied the impeachment effort directly to the completely discredited Russia Hoax, declaring twice that “all roads lead to Putin,” when you know that is an abject lie.  I have been far tougher on Russia than President Obama ever even thought to be.

Any member of Congress who votes in support of impeachment—against every shred of truth, fact, evidence, and legal principle—is showing how deeply they revile the voters and how truly they detest America’s Constitutional order.  Our Founders feared the tribalization of partisan politics, and you are bringing their worst fears to life.

Worse still, I have been deprived of basic Constitutional Due Process from the beginning of this impeachment scam right up until the present.  I have been denied the most fundamental rights afforded by the Constitution, including the right to present evidence, to have my own counsel present, to confront accusers, and to call and cross-examine witnesses, like the so-called whistleblower who started this entire hoax with a false report of the phone call that bears no relationship to the actual phone call that was made.  Once I presented the transcribed call, which surprised and shocked the fraudsters (they never thought that such evidence would be presented), the so-called whistleblower, and the second whistleblower, disappeared because they got caught, their report was a fraud, and they were no longer going to be made available to us.  In other words, once the phone call was made public, your whole plot blew up, but that didn’t stop you from continuing.

More due process was afforded to those accused in the Salem Witch Trials.

You and others on your committees have long said impeachment must be bipartisan—it is not.  You said it was very divisive—it certainly is, even far more than you ever thought possible—and it will only get worse!

This is nothing more than an illegal, partisan attempted coup that will, based on recent sentiment, badly fail at the voting booth.  You are not just after me, as President, you are after the entire Republican Party.  But because of this colossal injustice, our party is more united than it has ever been before.  History will judge you harshly as you proceed with this impeachment charade.  Your legacy will be that of turning the House of Representatives from a revered legislative body into a Star Chamber of partisan persecution.

Perhaps most insulting of all is your false display of solemnity.  You apparently have so little respect for the American People that you expect them to believe that you are approaching this impeachment somberly, reservedly, and reluctantly.  No intelligent person believes what you are saying.  Since the moment I won the election, the Democrat Party has been possessed by Impeachment Fever.  There is no reticence.  This is not a somber affair.  You are making a mockery of impeachment and you are scarcely concealing your hatred of me, of the Republican Party, and tens of millions of patriotic Americans.  The voters are wise, and they are seeing straight through this empty, hollow, and dangerous game you are playing.

I have no doubt the American people will hold you and the Democrats fully responsible in the upcoming 2020 election.  They will not soon forgive your perversion of justice and abuse of power.

There is far too much that needs to be done to improve the lives of our citizens.  It is time for you and the highly partisan Democrats in Congress to immediately cease this impeachment fantasy and get back to work for the American People.  While I have no expectation that you will do so, I write this letter to you for the purpose of history and to put my thoughts on a permanent and indelible record.

One hundred years from now, when people look back at this affair, I want them to understand it, and learn from it, so that it can never happen to another President again.

Sincerely yours,

DONALD J. TRUMP

President of the United States of America

ICHEOKU SAYS FROM US TO YOU, HAPPY HOLIDAYS!

ICHEOKU says this yuletide season, remember what is most important, peace and love. From ICHEOKU to you and yours, have the best the season can offer and rejoice. Happy holidays!

THE HOROWITZ REPORT: BLIND TO THE RECURRING IMPLICIT BIASES.

ICHEOKU says unfortunately, it appears that the main law enforcement institution in the country has been infected with the bug of crass partisan politics. As a result, its investigation now sways as it selectively sees fit. How could any reasonable person, faced with the mountain of evidence of the desire of the bureau to see one candidate prevail in the last 2016 presidential election, reach a conclusion that there was no bias in the bureau's investigative activities, both before, during and continuing after the election. 

Bias were flashing red everywhere you turned and starring everybody in the face; admitted they were mainly implicit in nature; but with such prevalence and no attempt to hide them that any rational person could easily infer their existence. Even the explicit bias would have been uncovered had those thousands of text messages and emails exchanged between lovers Peter Strzok and Lisa Page been released; but the FBI did not allow the public to see them or rather refused their release. These text messages were summarily hidden away, kept out of reach and out of sight and the only plausible reason for doing it is to shield some implicated persons in the spy gate scandal. So, American people are not fooled nor too stupid to buy into the lack of "evidence of bias" which the Inspector General tried to sell to them in his report. 

It is intelligence insulting and logic defying, requiring the suspension of disbelief, to concede the assertion by the Inspector General that “no bias” was established in the initiation of investigation of the Trump's campaign. If the FBI was not biased, why was it only Peter Strzok that was assigned to investigate both the Queen Crooked Hillary Clinton's 33,000 missing emails, as well as the President's supposed Russians infiltration of his campaign. Was he the only FBI agent available or competent enough to conduct such investigations. Why did Michael Horowitz disregard the text messages between the two lovers, where Peter Strzok was reassuring his lover Lisa Page that Donald Trump will never be president and that there is an insurance in place to achieve that. It is equally noteworthy that the same Peter Strzok boasted that Queen Crooked Hillary Clinton chances of defeating Donald Trump is one million to nothing, yet he entertained no bias against the president? 

James Comey's wife and their three daughters are Queen Crooked Hillary Clinton's staunch supporters, who participated in the march in Washington DC against the president, yet the inspector General wants America to believe that James Comey had no reason to nurse any animosity against the president, with his four angry women mounting pressure on him. It is also on record that the FBI did not concurrently inform Trump's campaign of the suspected infiltration of his campaign by the Russians; but informed the Queen Crooked Hillary Clinton's campaign to be vigilant of foreign infiltration. The same bureau previously had warned Senator Diane Feinstein of her long time driver being a Chinese agent. Why did the FBI not investigate the Queen Crooked Hillary Clinton's campaign or planted a spy therein just like they did with the Trump's campaign. Yet the Inspector General wants American people to believe that there was no bias in the bureau's investigative action against only the president. 

There were 17 uncommon errors made in the investigation of the president and you wonder why these many mistakes by such a premier investigative bureau, if they were not purposefully intentioned outcomes. One or two mistakes will be acceptable, but 17 is outlandishly fishy. Lastly, if there was no bias on their part in initiating and continuing the investigation of the president, why did the FBI continue with the FISA petition to the court long after they became aware that the dossier on which the petitions were based was fraught with errors? Why did they not stop or inform the court of the discovered mistake and also include the exculpatory evidence in their filings to the FISA court? But American people are expected to just accept it, nod their heads in support of their numero uno investigating bureau since they can do no wrong and are beyond reproach, right? 

ICHEOKU says since the Russian infiltration investigation was not the first rodeo for the FBI with such investigations, why did they get so many things so wrong in the FISA petition process, which has now become a FISA abuse scandal? Other than their implicit bias, such a renowned investigative agency usually does not unintentionally get such so many things wrong and in just one investigation. The frequency of so many coincidences makes the findings in the report, that no bias was established, simply unbelievable nor acceptable; and without further and additional information as to the prevalence of such irregularities and mistakes in their investigations, this stand alone incident is indeed suspect. 

Bias is most times implicit and should have been inferred from the conduct of all those who were involved in the investigation of the president and raising of the FISA documents. Just like James Comey wrongly stated during his usurped role not to indict Queen Crooked Hillary Clinton, when he falsely claimed that Hillary Clinton had no guilty intent and should have inferred her guilty intent from her conduct; this Michael Horowitz's somewhat exculpatory statement that "no bias" was found is equally suspect, as it should have been similarly established by inference. 

Simply put, the report appears to be just another cover up job, intended to shield the Deep State from being implicated in the whole scandal and protect them from facing consequences for their action. ICHEOKU reiterates that American people are not buying it, so until the culprits are identified and held to account for their intentional electoral malpractice and interference in our election, the current air of complicity and untrustworthiness will continue to shadow the FBI. Therefore it is in the FBI's own interest to transparently lift the fog of suspicion hovering over them and speedily too, in order to regain the confidence of the American people in their once straight laced bureau. Appearance is everything and the shadow of suspicion and lack of trustworthiness bedeviling the bureau is not good. It is shameful.

GRETA THUNBERG: UNDESERVINGLY NAMED.

ICHEOKU says the virus of political correctness has eaten so deeply into society, such that some once highly held honors have now succumbed to it. There was a time when certain honors were reserved and extremely treasured as a measure of respectability for those men and women who have made their marks on society's sand of time, having left indelible prints thereon for the betterment of society. But not any more, as everything has succumbed to fiery liberalism politics of crash and burn, that have made these honors no longer what they use to be, having lost their esteem, glory and value. 

This begs the question, what exactly has Greta Thunberg contributed to society that makes her deserving of such an honor of being named by Time Magazine as "Person of the Year?" Rather, the magazine should have named her "Child of the year" if it must; but a Person of the Year is rather laughable as it is both undeserving and unmerited.  Unfortunately, it is the same lowering of standards, which a globalized political correctness is foisting on society, which saw Barack Obama being awarded the Nobel Prize just a few days following his inauguration as president, that is once at play here with Time Magazine naming this lad its Person of the Year. 

ICHEOKU says a Person of the Year for what reason other than that she hitched a ride on a boat sailing to America from Europe and that now makes her a female version of Christopher Columbus; thus deserving of having her picture on the front page of Time Magazine, really? So, if she angrily wagged her finger at world leaders with her now infamous "How dare you" speech, that is now worthy of commendation. At best, it was rude and inappropriate for a child at her age to address her elders in such a pitched tone and finger wagging manner; admitted she is just a tool in the hands of Climate Change anarchists, who used her to push their Green Deal agenda. 

Anyway, without sounding bullish, a "Child of the Year" would have been more apposite for her, rather than a Person of the Year, since Greta Thunberg is not even matured enough in the real sense of it, to be so referred. She is just a child and a victim of Climate Change globalists propagandists who are pushing their agenda through her. That aside, she somewhat looks and behaves like a loveless child, who could indeed use some love, care and attention. She should spend some time at Disney World and some other amusement parks, enjoying her young youthful life, engaging in kid's pastime, instead of being mired in abrasive and cantankerous adult gladiators brickbat. Simply put, Greta is too young to play in adults game and should not be pimped around by those Climate Change trouble makers. ICHEOKU says please leave the frigging child alone.

JOE BIDEN'S CANDIDACY: A DEMOCRATIC PARTY'S ASSAULT ON AMERICA.

ICHEOKU says that the Democratic Party is pushing the candidacy of a nearly dementia stricken Joe Biden for president is an irrefutable fact in support of the accusation that the Democrats do not really love nor care deeply about America's wellbeing. Not even late Robert Mugabe was this mentally depleted in his waning days; but here is Joe Biden, who has literally moved across into his senior citizen days, with recurring bouts of senior citizen moments; yet this is who the Democratic Party wants Americans to elect president. A president of the free world, with a mental capacity close to a child and the disabled imbecile; and you ask yourself on whose team do these Democrats play on. 

ICHEOKU says has nothing against aging or senior citizens, having watched relatives age and grow old; but disturbing their golden years just for the purpose of using them as a tool to snag up power is sinfully, depraved hearted. How can anyone sincerely and truthfully think that the present Joe Biden is still a fit and proper person to be foist on the Democratic Party as their presidential candidate, knowing fully well that he will not perform well in the debates nor campaign well enough to be elected president; and will not be possessed of the meaningful mental capacity to effectively function as president. 

Yet the Democratic Party is ready to overlook all his apparent incapacities and grossly depleted mental acuity and functionality, jin their attempt to defeat President Donald John Trump. ICHEOKU says who will run the presidency in the unfortunate event he is miraculously elected or does the Democrats plan to run the country remotely and by proxy. 

ICHEOKU says does not know about you, but a man who has passed his prime time for such a very demanding national service is a wrong person for the job. Joe Biden has passed his feeding time and needs his bottle, so if he mistakes his wife's finger, there is no other person to blame other than those who are holding him hostage to the cause and wants to use him to achieve their objective. ICHEOKU says in case these people don't know, what they are doing to Joe Biden is elder abuse and it is a crime. #SetJoeBidenFree.

KAMALA HARRIS: WHY SHE CRASHED OUT, ANY LESSONS LEARNED?

ICHEOKU says she was the architect of her own demise, a mean spirited and very angry woman who showed her true color during the Judge Brett Kavanuagh's Senate confirmation hearing and now, she has been forced to pay the price with a rejection. She was needlessly so adversarial and so antagonistic of Kavanaugh just to prove to her lunatic, wild eyed, crazed out feminists liberal base, that she is a mean and nasty gal and could be as mean as they want her to be. But rational and reasonable American people do not like such a vindictive and vicious individual running their affairs and they said to her, thanks but no, thanks. Rejected, she threw in the towel like it was hot and scampered away from her once storied dream project.

But contrary to Kamala Harris's insipid explanation, she was not rejected because she was not a billionaire and unable to self fund her campaign. Former President Barack Obama was poorer than her when he was first elected president and went on to win a second term and he was not a billionaire. Former Presidents Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter weren't billionaires either; ditto Presidents John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, George H. Bush and George W. Bush, just to name a few from our recent past. None of these men were billionaires, yet they were elected presidents of America. In fact, American people has never elected a billionaire president until President Donald John Trump upstaged the political class with his improbable presidential election victory of November 8th, 2016.

So, what exactly does Kamala Harris mean when she blamed her not being a billionaire as the reason her impossible presidential campaign run went bust. The only plausible answer is that she did not want to take responsibility for her gross ineptitude in running a presidential campaign and had to provide an out. May be it was the women's thing of never accepting responsibility or admitting fault or taking blame for what went wrong, therefore it must be somebody's else or something else's fault. Instead of admitting the obvious, that she is not yet ready nor seasoned enough for the national prime time, heavy lifting that is presidential campaign  politics, she lied and misled her supporters, as well as the curious public, and said that her campaign hit the deep freeze because she was not a billionaire and could not self fund it going forward. 

ICHEOKU says but Mayor Pete Buttgieg is not a billionaire nor is he self funding his campaign; yet he is still moving forward with the primaries. Elizabeth Warren is not a billionaire either and she is still fueling her campaign with donations and contributions from the American people. Bernie Sanders, Amy Klobachar, Cory Booker, Andrew Yang and of course the grandfather of the candidates, Joe Biden, are still powering through with their campaigns and none of them is a billionaire. They are all raising money from their support base, who they convinced that they are serious contenders for the nomination and they are responding with contributions. But Kamala Harris brought about the chill on her prospective supporters and they closed their wallets, hid their check books and stowed away their credit cards. American people, whose contributions usually pays for candidate's campaigns, decided that Kamala Harris was not bankable and that did her in.

Kamala Harris failed to realize that running for president is not an all comers game; nor is it a game which political kids play. It is also not a beauty contest either. She also failed to understand that nobody can secure and anchor his or her boat in the White House by being always angry and constantly irritating, agitating and riling against America, particularly against majority white Americans. If only she had sought counsel from former President Barack Obama, who understood this fact of consequence and was very masterful at appeasing white folks, she would have performed much better than alienating a major voting bloc of American voters and expecting to have traction with her campaign to preside over them. 

The former president was very clever by always invoking the better part of white people and severally went out of his way to specifically cajole and court them. It was such a recurring decimal that when his campaign nearly got off track because of his association with his pastor Jeremiah Wright, he went all out to distance himself from Jeremiah Wright and technically throwing him under the bus, just to smoothen his path with white people, who did not like the audacity of Jeremiah Wright. He also dumped his Weather Underground friends, as well as any other person or thing that painted him as being an anti white people, angry black man. ICHEOKU is emphatic that had there been tougher  demand on Obama to demonstrate and prove that he likes white people, he would have literally, even denounced Michelle Obama as just a "baby mama", provided it earned him their trust and confidence. Even his relationship with Louis Farrakhan, including evidence of it in pictures which he took with him, were suppressed and outrightly denied.

Barack Obama understood clearly that without the acceptance, support and votes of white people that he stood no chance whatsoever of ever winning the primaries and the White House. So, he actively courted the love and support of white people, never criticized nor disparaged them, at least publicly; and it earned him a two terms presidential residency in the White House. Obama was smart as he understood what needed to be done; unlike Kamala Harris who failed to reassure the white people that they will be safe and that the country will be in good hands with her in the White House. Even Saturday Night Live tried to call her attention to her perception as a mean and angry black auntie, but her arrogance blinded her and her rage against white people wouldn't let her make use of the life line which was thrown by SNL and it showed. 

Kamala Harris's poor outing also showed that she couldn't do it by herself; another evidence that she did not meritoriously earn her rise in California Democratic Party politics. It also showed that her Willie Brown's connection could only go so far to help her nationally, as he is only a California State Democratic Party political operative and not influential nationally. Recall that Kamala Harris openly dated Willie Brown, a married father of three, to the chagrin of his wife and wanted him to divorce her so that she could marry him but he refused. She did not give a damn nor a care in the world about the hurt which the adulterous relationship caused to the heartbroken wife and her children. She had no scruples being a side chic either and she milked the affair maximally to become San Francisco's District Attorney, Attorney General of California and later, a replacement for retired Barbara Boxer, Senator from California. 

A newbie politician who wanted to be president but went soft on the establishment candidate, Joe Biden, seconds after her first strong showing of "I am that school girl" in the first debate. Like Mitt Romney did with Barack Obama in 2012, instead of maintaining the heat by piling on Joe Biden in the second debate, she choked into a "Hi Joe" courtesy, with her Delilah smile and devilish cute girl neck tilting body language. She thus came across as a fake, who was merely putting up a show and American people do not normally take kindly to people without conviction, character or core; or the strong will to take a stand on what they indeed believe in. American people took flight from her campaign, their initial curious attraction to a black lady from Californian who wanted to be president, having waned and suddenly evaporated. It became a matter of time.

But instead of taking full responsibility for her failed run, she blamed it on her not being a billionaire and could not self fund her campaign. Then ask her to name just one billionaire who has ever been elected president in America and she drew blank. According to her, even the only billionaire who has ever been elected president, President Donald John Trump, is just an "occupier" of the White House; which means that no billionaire has yet been elected president of the United States of America. So, why make the excuse of not being a billionaire, other than lack of self assessment. And speaking of lack of self reprimand, Queen Crooked Hillary Clinton, who till date still blames every other person and thing, short of herself, for being defeated by President Donald John Trump in 2016, lacks in this department. A clear evidence that there is the thing called the women's thing of never admitting fault or taking responsibility, as this two women have validated the stereotyping.

ICHEOKU says if American people had not seen through her anger and fakery, and had not rejected her, they would have contributed for her all the money that she would have ever needed for her campaign as is traditionally the practice. But Kamala Harris would rather not admit as to the true reason she crashed out of the primaries; otherwise she would have confronted herself for her poor outing. She should also find out why black people turned their backs at her and never warmed up to her throughout her short lived run. Possibly, because she is a black woman who publicly messed around with a black married man and another black woman's husband. Such a moral turpitude could have made her unacceptable to black people and they reacted accordingly, in solidarity with the woman whose heart Kamala Harris broke. 

To enable her understand why she lost out, Kamala Harris should also endeavor to rewatch the show of shame of "an angry black woman" which she put up before millions of American people during the Judge Brett Kavanaugh's Senate confirmation hearing. Also,  when Tulsi Gabbard tested her during the second debate, she was found to be without a backbone or knowledgeable enough to engage and play in the big league game that is presidential politics. She melted under the heat of Tulsi Gabbard's interrogation and quivered like a cornered mouse, unable to answer the charges of duplicity leveled against her nor offered an intelligent explanation for her actions. ICHEOKU says Tulsi Gabbard  literally drove the last nail on her campaign coffin and she never recovered her mojo thereafter and it became a matter of when and not if, she will eventually surrender her stake in the presidential primaries.  

ICHEOKU says was not surprised that Kamala Harris dropped out of the race, only that she blamed some other thing for her decision to pull the plug from an otherwise comatose campaign on life-support. She should have taken a true introspection and reflection on what actually flamed out her campaign. ICHEOKU says once wrote an article on her being permanently damaged for any nationwide election due to the role which she played in the hatchet job against Justice Brett Kavanaugh. (KAMALA HARRIS IS NOT BARACK OBAMA, WILL NOT WIN of July 20, 2019; published on ICHEOKU:Meniru.blogspot.com) American people are not ready for such an angry, crazed out, wild eyed feminist female as their president; the same reason, they rejected Queen Crooked Hillary Clinton in 2016; both women are nut jobs and they hate men, as well as America as it was founded. 

The rule of the game is to go hard or go home and Kamala Harris chose the later. She decided to call it quits even before Democratic Party voters in the primaries were allowed to formally send her home. She is a coward who chickened out before the first shots were fired in Iowa caucus and now only has the memories of a once ran candidate, to rue about. She flew up like an eagle but floundered out like a doomed pigeon; her undoing in addition, being her inability to carry on with the momentum which heralded her formal announcement to run in Oakland California and her failure to also continue with the offensive which she began in the first debate, when she delivered a near fatal blow on Joe Biden. 

ICHEOKU says is emphatic that had she continued and maintained the trajectory of hammer them down, she probably would be the one to beat today. But she was a phony and she fizzled out after American people decoded her deceiving mien. During the second debate, she made a complete u-turn from "That girl is me" to her now infamous quibble, "Hi Joe" and you wonder why the sudden sucking up to a man she literally called a racist during the first debate. American people were expecting to see her deliver more punches at a now weakened Joe Biden, but were disappointed to watch her kissing up and making up to Joe Biden. It registered a degree of un-seriousness on her part and it hounded her campaign till the end. 

Her failure to launch was a self induced crass incompetence. She is a talker and not a doer, who only thrived in running her mouth off against the president, a man who actually succeeded with his primaries and went on to win a presidential election and will win again in 2020. But without the national reach of her paramour Willie Brown, who helped her rise to political prominence in California, Kamala Harris was like a fish out of water; she gasped for air and she frantically trashed around until she asphyxiated on her own novitiate political inexperience and incompetent managerial skills running a national campaign.

As a new politician on the national scene, all she would have done was take a page from Donald John Trump's 2016 presidential primaries campaign and replicate the same demolition derby which the president carried out in 2016. She should have known that her only chance of ever breaking through into reckoning, was to punch through the surrounding wall and force her candidate on the party. That it would take bare knuckle punching to out punch her opponents, especially the establishment candidate, Joe Biden. That way, she would force the issue and give American people a reason to take a chance at the Wonder Woman who just happened on the national scene. This is exactly why Donald John Trump is in the White House today, as he forced his will on his opponents and by doing that, caught the riveting attention of the American people. 

Kamala Harris should have known that running a national presidential campaign is not a walk in the park nor a "Me Too" can play game. That it takes a lot more than a girlish silly smile, neck tilting and face making body language to mission accomplish. Presidential election is a serious business and the verdict was that she was ill prepared and not ready for such a prime-time gladiator's sport. She cannot just stumble on the national scene, competing with well established candidates with great names recognition and still playing it safe, softball lite. She should have done what she had to do, destroy and displace her opponents; and let the peace making wait until after her inauguration. That until victory was achieved, there is no brother or sister in the jungle and approached the debates and interviews with that savage mindset of eat or be eaten, taken no prisoner attitude. Politics is cutthroat; a thick jungle crawling with all manners of bad intentioned reptilians. 

Barack Obama understood this very well and did it to Hillary Clinton and later offered her a Secretary of State position to pacify her. Donald John Trump also did it to 18 Republicans, including Ted Cruz and made up with them later. Ditto Rick Perry and Ben Carson, who he later offered the positions of Energy and HUD Secretary, respectively. It is how the game is played because all the contestants want the same crown and there is only crown to be had. Unfortunately, Kamala Harris thought that it was play thing and that "Hi Joe" moment and her girlish courtesies were not a winning strategy. ICHEOKU makes bold to say that when all the hatred and anger at President Donald John Trump eventually dies down, political science students will be studying the feat of his 2016 presidential election campaign victory and writing thesis and defending dissertations based on it as how to run a winning presidential campaign. Kamala Harris failed and failed out.