Impeachment: A Sad Day for America!

By Michael Master

During the impeachment speeches just before the vote in the House, Democrats as led by Nancy Pelosi kept making the same talking point over and over that it was a “sad day for America.” 

Dressed in black as if at a funeral, Democrats tried to appear so solemn.   More hypocrisy.   Those same Democrats have been trying to use any excuse to remove Trump from office since the day he was elected.  Adam Schiff lied for 3 years that he had evidence that Trump colluded with Russians to affect the 2016 election. Al Green, Maxine Waters, the Squad, and a slew of Democrats refused to accept Trump as president.  And now they try to make us think how sad they are.   

Nancy Pelosi stated several months ago that impeachment would only go forward if 1.  there was overwhelming evidence of illegal activity by Trump and 2. if there was bi-partisan support for impeachment. 

***Support BeforeItsNews by trying APeX (far superior to colloidal silver) or any of our four other great health products at www.mitocopper.com ***

Democrats passed 2 articles of impeachment without any Republicans voting for it.  None.  Zero.  and 4 Democrats voted no or present.  4 Democrats defected. 

Democrats in the House did not achieve either of her requirements, but she still impeached Trump anyway.  Nancy lied.  

A sad day for America?  Maybe, but Democrats are rejoicing, not mourning as they try to appear.  

Now, what will the Senate do?

It is obvious that the Senate will not remove Trump from office.  Democrats will be lucky to get 45 Senators out of the 45 Democrat Senators to vote for it when they need 67 to remove Trump.  And no Republicans will vote to remove Trump (except maybe Romney).  

Pelosi is already complaining that impeachment will not get a fair hearing in the Senate.  

Impeachment get a fair hearing?  How about the accused getting a fair hearing?  Did Democrats provide a fair hearing for Trump in the House?  Did they use due process?  No, of course not.    

What is Pelosi implying?  The Senate is the jury, not the judge.  Chief Justice Roberts will preside over a hearing in the Senate.  So is Nancy saying that Roberts will be as partisan/biased as Schiff and Nadler were in the House?   Is she saying that Roberts will not administer a fair hearing?   

Or is the real problem that Roberts will enforce due process as stated in the Constitution that Schiff and Nadler ignored?  Will Roberts allow the Trump lawyer to call witnesses that the Democrats in the House refused to allow (i.e.  the whistleblower, Schiff’s staff, Hunter Biden)?  Will Roberts exclude hearsay evidence and only allow direct witnesses and evidence?  Democrats only produced 2 direct witnesses out of the 17 that they had testify.  And neither of them could verify any illegal actions by Trump.  

Schumer and Pelosi now claim that they need additional witnesses to make their case in the Senate.  

Once again, they must think that we the people have Schiff for brains.  If Democrats did not have enough witnesses in the House to make their case, then how did they vote to impeach Trump?  If they thought that they could not get a fair hearing in the Senate, then why did they impeach Trump?   They have known all along that they needed 67 Senators to remove Trump and only had 45 Democrat Senators. More hypocrisy.   

On that same day of the House impeachment vote, Horowitz (IG) was testifying about his investigation of the FBI.  Horowitz stated that the amount of errors (17) in the FISA requests goes beyond gross incompetence.   A case can be made that something other than incompetence was at work. 

Did Obama know about the FBI investigation of Trump?  Horowitz testified that Obama’s staff certainly knew. But that he was unable to question Obama personally and none of the staff would answer if they informed Obama. 

Horowitz also stated that he could not rule out political bias as affecting the FBI.  He stated that Comey signed off on the requests.   Comey refused to indict Clinton for destruction of evidence and allowed his staff to change “gross negligence” to “gross carelessness.”  The buck stopped with Comey…  and Clinton/Democrats benefitted from his actions.   

So how do you think that testimony by Horowitz to the Senate will affect Republican senators for the impeachment trial?  

Also, the Supreme Court stated that Trump did not have to comply with demands of Congress unless the courts said that he did because POTUS is an equal branch to Congress… and not subservient to Congress.  So what is the case for obstruction of Congress?  There is none since Democrats never requested a ruling from SCOTUS about their requests of Trump.  

As Turley testified, this impeachment is an abuse of Congressional power.  As Dr. Hill testified, the winner from this impeachment is Vladimir Putin as this impeachment divides Americans. Is that what Democrats want? A divided USA?  

Since Schiff started his impeachment drive as soon as Trump was elected, and especially since he lied for 3 years that he had evidence that Trump colluded with Russians to affect the 2016 election,  something other than Trump actions is driving this impeachment. What? 

Was it a sad day for Americans?  Yes, Democrats were not  trying to protect the Constitution.  They were using that as an excuse to justify their abuse of Congressional power, for abandoning due process, and as one more way to divide Americans.  Democrats violated the Constitution.  Add it to their list of class warfare, gender warfare, religious warfare, and race warfare as methods to divide us.  Putin is the winner.  It was a sad day for Americans.  

Permission by Author to Post

SEE THIS RELATED ARTICLE TOO:

President Donald Trump’s Full Letter to Nancy Pelosi on Eve of Impeachment Vote!

***Support BeforeItsNews by trying APeX (far superior to colloidal silver) or any of our four other great health products at www.mitocopper.com ***