And so it begins …

The Senate impeachment trial begins today. There’s only this to say:

Beyond a doubt, that sentiment is the truth and nothing but the truth.

Never forget that Peter Strzok complained that he could “smell” you because you supported a “loathsome” candidate.

Never forget that Hillary Clinton called you “deplorable” and also “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic.”

Never forget that the entire progressive universe, including their shills in the mainstream media, label Trump supporters as a “cult” of bigots, racists, white supremacists (no matter our color), with some now going so far as to declare that our voting rights should be null and void because it’s “unconstitutional” to support Trump. Got that? You should be disenfranchised because you can’t be trusted to vote correctly. Sound familiar?

Never, ever forget that their goal is to eliminate all opposition. All of it. Sound familiar?

Submit to their ideology or be sent to a gulag or worse, you “f**king Nazi.”

Watch the trial or not. Your choice.

But never forget that it’s YOU they really aim to “impeach,” and our Republic.




64 responses to “And so it begins …

  1. What happened? Magna Carta states , that a person charged with a crime is innocent until proven guilty to a jury of his peers in a formal legal proceeding.

    • The DemoncRATS and progressives seek to destroy our history and traditions. They have NO feeling whatsoever for any of it. In fact, they HATE our history, especially its “white” Anglo-Saxon roots. They hate our system of government. It’s an HONOR to them to destroy it, to spit on it, to overturn it. It’s THEIR GOAL.

  2. “Q” resumed posting today after a month long absence.
    “Q” said “This will be a week to remember”
    Hope so.

  3. Here is how I feel about the broadcasting of the “impeachment trial”:

  4. Thanks to everyone who read and “liked” the post. I’m honored. This may be a record for me. 🙂

    I welcome anybody posting snippets from the “trial,” such as we will find at The Gateway Pundit and The Conservative Treehouse. iow, the “best of” from the DEFENSE of the President and our Constitution and our elections and our democratic Republic.

    These people MUST be stopped at the get go. If this is not nipped in the bud, then THIS will be our future. Forever. What we’ve suffered over the past 3-4 years. Every Republican president from now on WILL BE IMPEACHED AND WILL BE GIVEN THE SAME TREATMENT.

    They have no intention of EVER respecting our votes, our wishes, the WILL OF THE PEOPLE. This entire show trial is about overturning democracy and thumbing their noses at the will of We the People. We the deplorables.

    Make no mistake, either: This is about getting TOTAL CONTROL of the reins of government, BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY. Their goal is the Senate, the House, AND the presidency but if not the presidency then they will certainly “settle” for the Senate because that will give them control over Bader-Ginsburg’s replacement on the SCOTUS.

    It’s do or die time for them and they know it. They will not, by any means necessary, allow President Trump to appoint and have confirmed another choice to the Supreme Court, because it’s by unconstitutional judicial fiat that they intend to RULE, as they’ve been doing, btw, for the past three years as they shop lawsuits around the country to, again, illegally and unconstitutionally, usurp the power of the President.

    It’s no mistake that their lawyers belong to a group called “law fare,” as in using/twisting the LAW to wage WARFARE. It’s what they do. It’s what they will continue to do if We the People don’t prevail.

    btw, did you see the outrage that Sotomayor publicly praised the election of Chesa Boudin? These are the unbiased circles, apparently, that the “justice” runs in. Bill Ayers.

    But Obama found that he could count on the Republicans to bend over and honor “tradition” and give HIM all his radical, partisan picks for the SCOTUS.

    Here’s a prediction, too: Biden is nothing but a place holder. They know he’s not going to be POTUS, but that’s not to say he won’t be their nominee and get elected, BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY.

    Watch for what they do to Bernie. AGAIN. This is why they’re dragging out impeachment. To hurt Bernie. They want Biden. Why, you may ask? Because …


    Biden will NOT stay in the position. Mark my words. He’s a Trojan Horse.

    The VP is the candidate. And that will be someone who WON’T be able to win on his or her own and they know it.


    I haven’t watched these yet. Just a taste of what’s going on.

    What I find amusing is that as I began to make dinner this afternoon, I noticed the wall-to-wall broadcast channel coverage. THAT will certainly endear Schiff to the legions of poorer “folks” who stay home and watch soaps and other daytime television but who find the few bright spots in their lives USURPED by that narcissistic fool. I hope they get a load of him such that those who vote DemoncRAT or even ever consider it change their minds.

  6. State of the Union address soon. POTUS wiping up the floor with the liberals at Davos. Is it coincidence that NOW is the time for the impeachment trial?

  7. Jay Sekulow >> Demolishes >> Schiff, >> Pelosi on Executive Privilege: Remember >>>>>>> Eric Holder YEP WTP DO DO DO !
    President Donald Trump’s personal attorney Jay Sekulow speaks during the impeachment trial against President Donald Trump in the Senate at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, Tuesday, Jan. 21, 2020. (Senate Television via AP)
    During his opening remarks in the Senate impeachment trial, President Donald Trump’s lawyer Jay Sekulow quoted Democrats’ Own Words against them. He condemned the House Democrats’ rush to impeach Trump, adding an article of impeachment for “Obstruction of Congress” rather than litigating a matter of executive privilege in court. He quoted House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), & Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), each of whom defended Barack Obama’s Attorney General Eric Holder when he was held in contempt of Congress in 2012.

    “Mr. Schiff did say the courts don’t really have a role in this. Executive privilege? Why would that matter? It matters because it’s based in the Constitution of the United States,” Sekulow said. “The president’s opponents in their rush to impeach have refused to wait for judicial review.”

    He quoted law professor Jonathan Turley, who warned, “I can’t emphasize this enough…if you impeach a president — if you make a high crime & misdemeanor of going to the courts, it is an Abuse of power. It’s your Abuse of power. You’re D O Precisely what you’re criticizing the president for doing.”

    “On June 28, 2012, Eric Holder became the first attorney general to be held in both civil & criminal contempt. Why? Because President Obama asserted executive privilege,” Sekulow noted.

  8. FUMES that’s ALL that is L E F T !!! STINKING GAS BOMB “FUMES” !!!
    Schiff, on floor at Senate impeachment trial, quietly fumes at Trump lawyers’ allegations

  9. FUMES that’s ALL that is L E F T ~ STINKING GAS BOMB “FUMES” !!!
    Schiff, on floor at Senate impeachment trial, quietly fumes at Trump lawyers’ allegations

    …. LET HIM GO … FREE THAT MAN!….flynn …

  10. 6′ UnanswereD Questions ? Surrounding the Biden Family’s Culture of Corruption …..DIRTY 2 the CORE …I think it’s 5 MEMBERS of BIDENS!

    ~ Archie Bunker •
    The Game is rigged for Professional Politicians.
    ~ TheLineIsDrawn •
    Pretty damn relevant considering Quid Pro Joe is leading Dim polls for president of the US, & considering the ON-Going shampeachment debate.

    But no, it goes without saying, nothing but crickets from Fake News. Nothing to see here! Saddest of all — no one in possession of a brain cell is the least bit surprised.

    Wouldn’t it be awesome if America had a press? !!! YEP BUTT’ …What
    is a P R E S S ? …. tell US! never ever SEEN 1 !!!

  11. Politico: Rep. Adam Schiff may have mischaracterized a piece of the Lev Parnas evidence …MIGHT HAVE? ….ha’ REALLY? how could that BE?

    Politico is reporting Tuesday night that House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff MIGHT? have “mischaracterized” some Evidence regarding
    >>>> Lev Parnas and his dealings with Ukraine. ….. WHAT A TIME 2 FIND OUT! ….HOW LONG has this GONE ON & ON & ON???

    • It’s a miracle and a rare thing indeed when Schiff DOESN’T “mischaracterize” anything to do with the POTUS.

    • They left out the word “deliberately,” didn’t they? Surely Schiff had the UNREDACTED message all along. So who redacted it? And why?


    “The United Nations ruled that “climate refugees” cannot be returned back to their home countries. This ruling forces the United States to allow all Central Americans into our country.

    Literally, anyone can claim the new refugee status.

    This will essentially open US borders for good.

    Now the left has combined open borders with junk science to create climate refugees. …

    It is unlawful for governments to return people to countries where their lives might be threatened by the climate crisis, a landmark ruling by the United Nations human rights committee has found.

    The judgment – which is the first of its kind – represents a legal “tipping point” and a moment that “opens the doorway” to future protection claims for people whose lives and wellbeing have been threatened due to global heating, experts say.

    Tens of millions of people are expected to be displaced by global heating in the next decade.”

    I warned about and predicted this almost SIX YEARS AGO:

    THIS IS THE ENTIRE RATIONALE BEHIND THE JUNK SCIENCE KNOWN AS “MAN-CAUSED CLIMATE CHANGE.” Its purpose is SOLELY to redistribute the wealth of OUR COUNTRY, if not by directly taking it then by redistributing the population of the Third World TO our country.

    Because they say that the ENTIRE GLOBE is “threatened by the climate crisis,” then that means NOBODY can be returned to their home countries. Doesn’t it?

  13. Adam Schiff: Americans are Too>>>>> Stupid to Decide Elections

    Rush Limbaugh erupts: ‘The son of a … actually said i

    Well Schiff for brains,
    on this one I actually have to agree with you! That is exactly how you Got elected, all the misinformed, uneducated idiots who put you into Office prove your >>> point in a big way!

  14. Only Trial Witnesses Can Expose the Evil Anti-Trump Coup

    Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff, a& their Jackal Pack are already howling that a Senate trial dismissal vote or a trial without witnesses amounts to a “cover-up.” >>>>>>> !!!! We don’t care what they think.

    • JUST the tip of the iceberg, no doubt. And if they say 16 actually voted, then how many ILLEGAL aliens actually voted? These are non-citizens the government KNOWS ABOUT. How do they cross check registrations when they have no DOCUMENTATION (except forged) that is even ALLOWED to prove or disprove citizenship? The CENSUS isn’t going to be allowed to ask. There’s NOTHING on the documents people are allowed to present as IDs that specifies whether one is a citizen or not.

    • Well, he certainly does resemble the prince more than the prince resembles his own father (although Diana’s bro was a “ginger”).
      What a shame for Barry and Moo that they weren’t chosen. How will the godparents keep in touch now that Archie’s moving to Canada? Oh, well, I forgot. GLOBAL WARMING is only an issue for the peons. The “royals” can burn up as much fossil fuels as they deem “necessary” flying back and forth across the Pond. I read somewhere that Prince Harry’s already made 11 CO2-generating, wasteful trips just recently. Do as the royal WE say, not as the royal WE do.

  15. Nancy Pelosi is a smart woman, or so we’ve been told. Shrewd, calculating, and ruthless are words also used to describe the current Speaker of the House. But for those of us paying attention, it’s become apparent she’s asleep at wheel. Consumed by the impeachment scam, hoping to damage the Trump brand beyond all repair; since beating him at the ballot box in November will be a near to impossible task, Pelosi is either ignoring the chaos brewing in her own party or she simply doesn’t care. There’s a perfect storm bearing down on the Democrats

    • Pelosi is the person who gave us the Constitutionally ineligible Barry and she KNEW IT but “vouched” for him, anyway. There’s NOTHING she won’t pull, nor Hillary, either, nor Barry. They’re willing to overturn the 2016 election, to hell with 63 million voters. Do you think they care about disenfranchising their own party members? They are ALL FOR DEMOCRACY and the WILL OF THE PEOPLE so long as the voters vote the way THEY WANT THEM TO VOTE. Otherwise, disenfranchisement. Watch how quickly they will regret giving blacks the vote if black voters suddenly vote Republican.

  16. old BURN US ….often!!!

    LOST in the FOG …. DAY 2′ … & DAY 1 ALSO!!! ….JERKS …total MESS

    • They treat their own primary voters the same way they treat the POTUS. They plan to STEAL the nomination IF their people don’t vote the “right” way. Do DemoncRATS really delude themselves into believing their primary votes count?

    • If they “intervene,” it will be to push Moo into the mix and make sure the nomination is a done deal for “her.” Or Bloomberg. There’s something shady going on. Well, that’s a given. We’re talking DemoncRATS. It almost looks as if they’re fixin’ to ditch Joe. But that doesn’t mean they’ll go for Bernie. Maybe it will be Buttzy. My theory about Biden/Obama or Biden/Clinton or Biden/whoever (how’s about AOC) holds. IF he gets the nomination, the intended POTUS will be the VP choice, not Joe. They can’t win fair and square. They know it. ALL they can do is cheat, lie, steal, conspire, finagle, corrupt. So there WILL BE some dirty trick involved and who the people vote for will NOT be the person who ends up in the WH, provided somebody beats DJT, which doesn’t seem likely. But then again. THEY CHEAT. All the illegal aliens will be mobilized to the polls. Double voters, too. Dead voters, too. They have done so much illegal and crooked, unethical stuff over the past 4 or more years (actually longer) that nothing is beyond them at this point. It’s make or break and they know it. It’s about SCOTUS but it’s also about this: They actually plan to impeach not only Trump (should he win in 2020) but ALSO Kavanaugh by taking the Senate. Then they can block any SCOTUS pick, impeach unilaterally, and impeach Kavanaugh (they hope. Since they rigged the House impeachment process, then even though they need 2/3 vote in the Senate to impeach, they will probably find a way to make pro-Trump or pro-Kavanaugh Senators not be “present.” They will develop their crooked schemes as needed, when needed.)

  17. ..lalala … the JERK SQUAD ….is SINKING ….in the LIES & MUCK
    CALLED .. H O M E !!! …WHAT DIRTY RATS they ALL R !!! TRASH!


    So this guy secretly recorded the President of the United States? IF the recording is legitimate, that is.

    The media and the DemoncRATS have been warning us for over a year about “Deep Fakes.” Remembering the truism that what they accuse you of doing or plan to accuse you of doing, is WHAT THEY DO OR PLAN TO DO ALREADY. So …


    Note how the mainstream media parse. The voice “appears” to be the President’s.

    “”Get rid of her!” is what the voice that appears to be Trump’s is heard saying. “Get her out tomorrow. I don’t care. Get her out tomorrow. Take her out. OK? Do it.” …”

    So the voice “appears” to be Trump (how does a voice appear? Wouldn’t it sound? I digress …).

    How do we know the provenance? How do we know that the recording wasn’t heavily edited? How do we know Trump was talking about the ambassador and not, for example, Hillary Clinton or some other female? How do we know they didn’t record something he said at a rally about Hillary and insert it into this recording?

    Why is it okay to secretly record the President and then pass it to the media?

    Why is there a fundamental flaw in the timing of what Parnas himself says? (With regard to him, on tape, saying Trump’s advisor said Pompeo hasn’t yet been confirmed by the Senate, and yet he had been confirmed. Are we to believe the POTUS and his staff didn’t know that his pick was already confirmed?)

    It’s the little things that trip them up.

    Now let’s consider that supposedly this tape was given to the Southern District of NY feds. (WHO ELSE?) Under what authority? IF it’s evidence in some case they’re investigating, then who leaked it to the media, thus destroying its evidentiary value? IF Parnas’s lawyer or Fruman’s or Fruman or Parnas gave it to the media, then wouldn’t you think this would be unethical or criminal, if they know that it’s evidence in a criminal investigation? For this very reason Obama’s administration and even Trump’s DOJ refused to give Congress evidence–part of an on-going investigation. Or are they trying to ruin any criminal case AGAINST Parnas and/or Fruman so they reveal the “evidence” to use against Trump and it becomes a twofer?

    One wonders if Trump has a case against Fruman–a lawsuit for secretly recording him on his own property. This happened at Trump Tower. What are the laws in DC?

    “… you may record a conversation or phone call if you are a party to the conversation or you get permission from one party to the conversation in advance. …”

    That makes it interesting. WHO did the phone belong to? If NOT Parnas or somebody else in the conversation, then was it illegally recorded? Where was the phone? This story says on a table and that it was Fruman who recorded it. But is that true? How do we know? WHO was in the conversation? When does a “conversation” begin and end when you’re at a dinner table or in a large group at a big event? If it’s not Parnas’s phone, then whose was it and was that person a party to the conversation or give permission to record? From the conversation as reported in the media, Fruman was NOT a party to the conversation. Did Parnas give him permission IN ADVANCE to record the conversation? IF so, then WHY? Are these two yet more plants like Halper et al to “get” the President? To SPY ON HIM? Obviously, somebody was spying on him.

    Here’s the bottom line, the way I read the laws: If Fruman was NOT a party to THAT particular conversation and IF he didn’t get explicit permission to record it from someone who was, then this is an illegal recording. Of course, I’m not a lawyer but I’m sure the President has plenty of them and may want to file a suit. It even seems that potentially Parnas or someone else in the conversation may have had to give WRITTEN permission for the “wiretapping” to happen.



      “Regardless of whether state or federal law governs the situation, it is almost always illegal to record a phone call or private conversation to which you are not a party, do not have consent from at least one party, and could not naturally overhear. In addition, federal and many state laws do not permit you to surreptitiously place a bug or recording device on a person or telephone, in a home, office or restaurant to secretly record a conversation between two people who have not consented. …”

      So Fruman, it’s reported, is the one who made the recording. The phone was left on a table nearby and recording. WHERE was Fruman at the time? WAS HE party to the conversation? Was he in a location where he could have naturally overheard? WHO gave Fruman permission to record? This sounds suspiciously like someone deliberately placing a phone that is in record mode in the vicinity of the President and hoping to catch something they could use at some point against him.

      “surreptitiously place a bug or recording device” to “secretly record a conversation”

      Check? Devil is in the details, but of course the complicit media WON’T ASK about details.

      I wonder if there are any similar audio recordings of Barry floating around out there? Isn’t it ODD that nobody has EVER done anything like this to him? I guess it’s a matter of who has honor and who doesn’t.


    Maybe I’m beating a dead horse and maybe I’m the only one who cares about such mendacity, but this story makes it sound AS IF Parnas didn’t know about this tape before somebody played it for him, so he couldn’t have given Fruman permission to record. Right? And are we to believe that Trump or his “aide” gave Fruman permission?

    ““Last year, before he was arrested, Mr. Parnas personally heard a recording of his April 30, 2018 dinner with the president and others, made by Mr. Fruman, at which the subject of Ambassador Yovanovitch was discussed,” Bondy said. “We have hoped that, to the extent this recording still existed, it would be released to Congress for use in the impeachment trial.” A lawyer for Fruman was not at liberty to discuss the matter. …”

    Hmm. Why wouldn’t the lawyer be “at liberty to discuss the matter?”

    Because it would put his client in more legal jeopardy for potentially illegally recording this conversation?

  20. facebkwallflower

    I know they are kids and I should cut them some slack, but no MAGA hat this year. Wonder if settlement included not wearing this year to event? There is no pretending we won this one. Disappointed.

    • Oh, I didn’t even notice. It is disappointing because, best case scenario, he made the choice to not wear the hat in order to protect himself and his friends from a repeat of last year’s hatred. Which, of course, if so, means that the left’s disgusting tactics WORK in that they inhibit people from exercising their Constitutional rights. BULLYING, iow, works for them, so they will keep doing it. THIS is their goal. To diminish, in any way, by any means necessary, TRUMP’S MESSAGE. To prevent as many people as possible from openly supporting Trump and from hearing Trump’s message, one day at a time, one person at a time, incrementally. They WILL take a “win” no matter how small because they know it all adds up. Every little bit of inhibition helps. Every little bit of intimidation helps. All designed to make THEIR VIEW the “correct view” and to PUNISH/SHAME anyone who disagrees. The Faith Militant, iow, with the “faith” being fascist “progressivism.”

      • facebkwallflower

        miri, you are the only one that gets why no hat means something. anywhere else I mentioned this, I was chastised or they gave excuses…The school made no hat policy (then dont go representing school. that would show future leadership). And maybe he did not want to detract from purpose of march (stop killing babies with gov blessing is maga core). I suspect it was part of of the settlement (he soldout which shows he is nothing special as teenagers go.)

        • So the school itself capitulated to the bullying. Well, it’s possible the parents themselves insisted on the policy to protect their children from abuse, which they know would probably happen. I can understand, also, the potential argument that it’s not a Trump rally but a pro-life rally, but in this country you can’t find many pro-life people who aren’t also pro-Trump (and for the same reason). I can’t imagine it being in a settlement that he not support the president. Can someone legally ask another person in a settlement (that’s overseen by a government judge) to give up a constitutional right (free speech)? Can you imagine any judge saying okay to any settlement that said, for example, a black victim can get X amount of dollars but can’t in the future proclaim “Black Lives Matter”? Or some victim of sexual assault (the woman allegedly raped by KB, e.g.) who gets a settlement on the condition that she never joins the MeToo movement or speaks out against rape? In the Covington case, CNN was the perp, so why would part of any settlement mean that Nick can’t support the POTUS but that CNN can go on attacking him? Why would CNN ask Nick to not wear MAGA hats again?

          • facebkwallflower

            oops, I was notclear. i do not know if school made policy but if that is reason, he should have found a work around. He garnered positive attention by MAGA Millions. We stood up for him and the end result was him becoming a millionaire. It just bugged me how so many posts we are praising him for such a great young man and going to be a great conservative leader, blahblahblah. I see no MAGA hat a contradiction.

    • iirc, those kids said last year that they bought the MAGA hats in DC, either during or after the March. It’s possible the organizers wanted only “March for Life” blue hats (as seen in the photos) so as not to distract from the message, although seeing as how the POTUS was speaking to them for the first time, you’d think they could have supported HIM. Since the kids didn’t bring their MAGA hats last year, specifically, to the March, then maybe that’s why they didn’t bring them again this year. I doubt the settlement would have included something like that.

      • facebkwallflower

        March theme hats pushed to promote cause or to stop it being recognized as a MAGA cause by the pompous, self-righteous conservatives who have used abortion and moral highground to control our voting?

        Years ago I read something really good and have been able to rember enough to get it through google search. it was history, and included cruz using the technique, about the howto’s in using religion and faith and morality to build a voter base, how to get Christians to first vote morals and not Constitution. oh well.

        • The media themselves are the ones who equate pro-life marches with pro-Trump rallies. The march is called the March for Life, isn’t it? Today I read an article that twisted itself into pretzels to NOT call it what it is, what the people who were marching defined it as. They referred to the marchers as “anti-abortion rights” marchers. Later they called it an “anti-abortion” march. NOWHERE in the article was the word “life” even used, even though that was the entire purpose of the march and the message the marchers wanted to send. So not only does the media ignore and insult these marchers, but they also DELIBERATELY SUPPRESS THEIR FREE SPEECH–the very speech they are trying to get out there: LIFE IS WORTH MARCHING FOR. LIFE IS WORTH ADVOCATING FOR. FETAL LIVES MATTER.

          The media are all, to a one, CORRUPT, in the tank for the “politically correct” radical progressive mindset. There’s no way they can even pretend to be objective purveyors of the news or information. When they call the March for Life (that’s its NAME) an “anti-abortion rights march”, they have given up any claim to objectivity and real journalism.

          At this point, imho, THEY’RE the ones who should lose the protection of the Constitution. The First Amendment protects the freedom of the press but the caveat is that the press ought to be fair if they wish to continue to use not-for-profit status. They’re the ones who have inserted into the Constitution that with rights come responsibilities and in this case and with other progressive causes, they’ve decided that one’s constitutional rights hinge upon them asserting the “right” mindset–meaning the progressive one.

          If you don’t agree with gay rights, then you should have no constitutional rights. If you don’t agree with abortion, then you should have no constitutional rights. They completely corrupt the entire purpose of the First Amendment, like they corrupt everything else. They’re totalitarians. Despots in the making.

  21. BIDEN …T H R O W S >> a TREAT? or 2 …or 3 …or MO’ ? … O’ ha’

    How many Stupid blacks will stay on the Democrats’ plantation, believing Biden’s outrageous Lie that Trump is a n*****-hating white supremacist?
    My fellow black Americans, please sSTOP scarfing up Democrats’ ….
    racist dog biscuits.

    Trump is Offering blacks “real” hope and change. C’mon, black brother
    & sister Americans. It’s time to get A-Board the Trump Train. !!! YEP!

    Lloyd Marcus, The Unhyphenated American
    Help Lloyd spread the Truth

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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