• SCC

The Big Lie


To impeach or not to impeach, that is the question. Well, that question was answered by Nancy Pelosi recently when she announced that the House of Representatives would move forward with Articles of Impeachment against President Trump to force him out of office.

Although she did say it would happen, she did not elaborate as to when the House would hold their vote.


First, what does this mean? Impeachment is the process by which a legislature brings charges against an officer of government for crimes alleged to have been committed. At the federal level, this is at the discretion of the House of Representatives.


Most impeachments have concerned alleged crimes committed while in office, though there have been a few cases in which officials have been impeached and subsequently convicted for crimes committed prior to taking office. The impeached official remains in office until a trial is held. That trial, and their removal from office if convicted, is separate from the act of impeachment itself.


The Big Lie, def. is a propaganda technique and logic trick.

“A lie so colossal and outrageous that no one would believe a person could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.''

Adolf Hitler-

Mein Kampf


“Tell a lie long enough and to enough people and it eventually becomes the truth”

Joseph Goebbels- Reich Minister of Propaganda for the Nazi Party


Analogous to a trial before a judge and jury, these proceedings are conducted by the Senate. However, impeachment is not a criminal proceeding, as the defendant does not risk forfeiture of life, liberty or property; the only penalty is removal from office upon conviction by two-thirds of the Senators present. Upon conviction a second vote is held to determine, by simple majority vote of the Senators present, if the convicted office holder shall be barred from holding further federal office.


It is interesting to note that no US President has ever been convicted in an impeachment trial.

The Constitution says that any civil officer can be impeached by the commission of “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” . This vagueness of definition has led to much confusion as to what is and what isn’t an impeachable offense, but most constitutional scholars agree that the framers intended that those offenses carry an extremely heavy weight and cause or have the potential to cause serious damage to the Republic.


I say and italicize most here because after listening to three of the four constitutional scholars who testified on Wednesday, I am not sure that they agree on, or even understand a damned thing.


What is clear however is that the House Democrats (and many Republicans) want Trump out of office, (for reasons which can be explored another time), period. Of course the question is, do they have a case strong enough to convince the Republican controlled Senate to convict?

After listening to the impeachment hearings and summaries, and Speaker Pelosi’s press conference early December, it appears that the Democrats case will center around quid pro quo, bribery, coercion and perhaps back to obstruction of justice in the Muller probe. Again the question being, is their case strong enough?


Well, let’s look at the facts…


Well, let’s look at the Fact one: None of the witnesses in these hearings, save one, had any direct contact with either President Trump, or President Zelensky, during the phone conversation in question, were not part of that conversation, nor spoke to President Trump, or President Zelensky after that phone conversation.


The lone exception being EU Ambassador Gordon Sondland who clearly stated that the President wanted no quid pro quo. The fact is that all of the testimony given was second or even third hand knowledge, and completely opinion based. One of the most damaging of testimonies to the Democrats case was that of former Ukraian Ambassador Marie Yovonovich. Her four hour rambling included no factual knowledge of any criminal misdoings by Trump and focused on her firing by the hands of the President, and her “hurt feelings” regarding that firing.


When asked directly by Representative Chris Stewart of Utah, “Do you have any information regarding the President of the United States accepting any bribes?” Yovanovich replied with a simple “No.” When further asked; “Do you have any information regarding any criminal activity that the President of the United States has been involved with at all?” she again replied, “No.” I’m sorry but hurting someone's feelings is not an impeachable offense.


Fact two: It never happened. READ THE TRANSCRIPT. Trump does ask Zolensky to look into the election interference of 2016 with AG Barr, and Hunter and Joe Biden and their involvement with Barisma and the firing of Ukranian Prosecutor Viktor Shokin in particular (Joe Biden was recorded on video stating that if Ukraine did not fire Shokin the US would withhold 1 billion dollars in aide money during his second term as Vice President). But He never, ever mentions his withholding of aide to Ukraine. In fact, Democrat witness Gordon Sondland stated in testimony that he did have a phone conversation with the President in which Trump stated “I want no quid pro quo” with Ukraine in regards to aide, just tell him to “do the right thing”.


Further, Trump has paved the way in securing the Javelin anti-tank missiles for purchase by Ukraine which have been identified as pivotal in their defense against Russia, a move previously denied by the Obama administration. Aide was delayed to (1) ensure that it was being properly used by one of the historically more corrupt governments in Eastern Europe and (2) that newly installed President Zolensky was in a position to properly receive and distribute the funds. Regardless, the President is under no Constitutional duty to deliver any aide to any foreign nation and the delay or even withholding of such is not an impeachable offense.


Fact three: The Republicans control the Senate. The Democrats and their leadership have no hopes of having Trump removed from office and in fact they don’t actually want him removed at all, this is all show and folly. Currently, 31 Representatives of the lower house hold seats in Districts that Trump won in 2016, and by all polling indications, that he will win again in 2020. If Trump were to be removed from office, the backlash vote would be the death nail to those 31 and would regain control of the House of Representatives for the Republicans. So why file articles of impeachment?


(1) it satisfies the hatred of the more radical fringe of the Democratic party who wants Trump out regardless of legal or factual cause and


(2), it consumes time. This second one is really quite brilliant of Nancy Pelosi who if nothing else, is an effective political tactician. By occupying the time of the House and its members in impeachment proceedings and hearings, the Democrats have effectively stonewalled the procession of any legislation.


The USMCA trade agreement is a prime example. There is bi-partisan agreement that the USMCA is a win-win-win for the United States, Mexico and Canada and would create another 200,000 jobs in this country alone. In fact it has been ratified by both the Mexican and Canadian governments, however with the House embroiled in impeachment theatrics, they can’t bring it to a vote. Why is this a good thing for Democrats? First, it shows the American people that Trump can’t work with Washington to get things done (regardless or who’s fault it is) and second, it gives Trump less accomplishments to tout on the campaign trail. The USMCA in particular would be a very pretty feather in his cap. A good strategy if it doesn’t backfire on them.


The bottom line is this, the Democrats know they dont have the facts, nor the support of the Senate to remove Trump from office. This is a ploy to distract the American people, make a sitting President as ineffective as possible, and deflect attention from their candidates who are abismal. The Democrats have absolutely NO ONE who comes even close to beating Trump in 2020 and they know it. They don’t have an intelligent, charismatic candidate and they don’t have a message or a plan for the American people that improves their lives from where they are today.


We have been lied to. We have been lied to by Adam Schiff for two years. First when he told us he had indisputable evidence that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to affect the outcome of the 2016 election. Two years and 40 million dollars later there is still no evidence to support those claims. Second, he lied to us about the existence of hard evidence and first hand witnesses who observed a quid pro quo enacted by Trump against President Zelensky when no such evidence existed. There were no first hand witnesses to any quid pro quo and when questioned under oath these witnesses had to admit that they had no knowledge of Trump committing any illegal, impeachable offense.


We have been lied to by Nancy Peliso in her statement to the press and in her recent CNN town hall where she told the Amercian people that “They must introduce articles of impeachment” (in explanation), “You cannot violate the constitution in full view. The facts are clear, they were presented by people that had access to the situation”, “the President violated the constitution.” All while knowing full well that there were no witnesses to any criminal act and no evidence to support a violation of the constitution.


And finally we have been lied to by the press. In full Joseph Goebbels’ fashion, they have continually repeated, repeated and repeated the lies of our elected officials hoping that we are stupid enough to one day see them as the truth. But, Goebbels was wrong. The truth is the truth, and all the lies, misinformation and propaganda in the world cannot change the facts. We deserve better.


As always, don’t take my word or anyone’s word and especially the word of those whose word had no honor. Do your own homework and find the truth.

60 views

(800) 730-7201

©2018 by Speedy Concrete Cutting, INC.  All Rights Reserved.