thelibertydaily--2020-01-30--Top 8 Reasons Trump Already Won Impeachment

Whether the senators put the trial out of its misery this week or drag it on for months , the outcome is a foregone conclusion .
Here are the eight big reasons Trump won impeachment .
President Donald Trump will not be removed from office following his impeachment by the House of Representatives and a trial in the Senate .
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has reportedly told colleagues they have the votes to finish things this week .
Whether the senators put the trial out of its misery this week or drag it on for months , the outcome @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the eight big reasons why Trump won impeachment .
It ’ s an obvious point , but the most important point .
Impeaching President Trump has been the stated goal of the Resistance since his inauguration .
The main effort toward impeachment was through the investigation of a false and dangerous theory of treasonous collusion with Russia to steal the 2016 election .
Even with a limitless special counsel appointed to achieve that end , the Russia collusion hoax ended with not a single American found to have colluded with Russia , not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or Trump himself .
A mini-effort to get impeachment going — on the special counsel ’ s murky near-findings that Trump had objected too strenuously to being falsely accused of treason — also fell apart .
Other impeachment efforts for , among other things , mean tweets , went nowhere .
With time running out , the Resistance cobbled together what was always a weak theory regarding a phone call with the Ukrainian president .
At first the alleged crime was supposed to be a campaign finance violation , then bribery , then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of impeachment , neither ofor an actual crime , and one a more or less laughable claim that the president can ’ t use courts to defend his rights .
The other was a complicated argument regarding abuse of power that required not just hiding all exonerating evidence but the worst possible construction on what remained .
It was such a weak argument that not a single Republican in the House fell for it and three Democrats declined to go along with their own party .
The range of opinion outside the Resistance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ranges from it being , in Trump ’ s words , “ perfect ” to merely good or fine to not good .
Resistance members tried to put forth the claim that the call was none of these things but impeachably bad .
Even with the help of a compliant media , there is simply not enough consensus around this extreme viewpoint to justify even censure , much less bipartisan agreement toward impeachment , much less a removal from office .
Trump ’ s avoidance of a crime or any real break with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in his acquittal .
With a histrionic media and political base spending the last few years demanding impeachment , House Democrats surely had hoped that President Trump would do something justifying an impeachment inquiry .
They undoubtedly were not pleased when the best they had to work with was Trump asking for help investigating Ukraine ’ s known 2016 election meddling or investigation into Biden family corruption in Ukraine .
So they started with a weak hand .
But they failed to follow a good process .
They didn ’ t have the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the process .
This decision made it unlikely that the many early subpoenas they sought would be deemed valid by a court of law if contested .
They refused to have courts validate their subpoenas , refused to let the GOP call their own witnesses , and suppressed information that was not helpful to their impeachment cause .
Of the 78 days of the impeachment proceedings , they denied the president any right to counsel or due process for 71 days of them .
In general , the procedure was rushed and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more credible was never sought or acquired .
3 .
Democrats Failed to Get a Single Republican on Board Their Impeachment Scheme It is nothing short of amazing that not a single Republican member of Congress joined with Democrats in their impeachment effort .
There are plenty of Republican members who either dislike or even loathe the president .
But even they didn ’ t find the impeachment to be credible .
The Resistance was also failed by its NeverTrump wing .
That wing had pushed Justin Amash to dramatically leave the Republican @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his op-ed as to why and promptly lost any sway with anyone other than the tiny NeverTrump movement .
NeverTrump has long demonstrated trouble with strategic thinking and impulse control , so following their advice and leaving the party in a snit was an unforced error .
Had Amash stayed with the party , the Resistance in the media and Democratic Party would have been able to make much more use of him .
4 .
Inexplicable 1-Month Delay In Sending Impeachment to the Senate A main argument in favor of impeaching President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it was supposed to be that day , was so dire that it required his immediate removal from office .
The House Democrats couldn ’ t afford to wait a matter of months until a new election would be held and Americans could decide whether the “ perfect ” phone call was in fact so bad that it required the first removal from office of an American president in history .
Impeachment and removal had to happen immediately , they claimed .
But then after voting to impeach the president , perhaps sensing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and hoping for more information to come to light , Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi inexplicably sat on the articles for a month .
It killed whatever momentum the Resistance had and made a mockery of the whole process .
Instead of turning things over to the effective Republicans who had handled the impeachment process so well on the House side , President Trump instead opted to put together a powerhouse collection of attorneys uniquely suited to address an audience of senators and the American people .
Even among their class of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ view of themselves and their office .
Every senator ’ s ego must be stroked .
They don ’ t want to feel upstaged , spoken down to , or lectured .
Patrick Philbin , Trump ’ s deputy general counsel , exemplified the defense team ’ s deliberate choice to put in front of senators someone who had encyclopedic knowledge of the law and this particular case , someone not there to make a name for himself .
Philbin ’ s humble and bookish demeanor was neither bombastic nor flamboyant as he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and their significance .
The other members of the team were also well chosen to argue their points .
By contrast , House Democrats picked impeachment managers who seemed perfectly calibrated to annoy and grate on those handful of senators whose votes were up for grabs .
Reps. Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler were the leaders of a group that repeated their highly partisan talking points and used hyperbolic and loaded language .
The media loved it , but it went over like a lead balloon with the non-Resistance senators .
The House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were complicit in a cover-up .
They suggested that the senators were unable to vote properly because President Trump would put their heads on pikes if they didn ’ t vote to acquit .
They refused to answer specific and direct questions about whether the whistleblower worked for Biden , was involved in any decisions regarding Burisma , or about his interaction with Schiff ’ s staff .
Even the Washington Post — even the Washington Post — gave Schiff four Pinocchios for lying about his staff ’ s secret collusion with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ difference between the competent and highly skilled attorneys on the White House team and the bumbling and somewhat mediocre team of House managers was so pronounced it was almost embarrassing .
It was as if one side belonged in front of the Supreme Court and the other failed to make the finals at a middle school debate tournament .
Along with the delay of the articles of impeachment , the House managers deployed a slow drip of supposedly damaging information .
First they put Lev Parnas out as a “ bombshell ” witness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is indicted for various crimes and is something of a hustler and influence peddler who worked his way through Washington and supposedly had some type of negative information about Trump .
While the argument that Rudy Guiliani shouldn ’ t have been working with him in any way has merit , it ’ s a difficult argument to make while walking hand-in-hand with the same individual .
Senate Minority Leader went so far as to invite Parnas to be his guest at the trial , which made the scene look more like a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this week , House Foreign Affairs Chairman Eliot Engel issued a press release saying that he had been given information from a disgruntled former employee of Trump ’ s in mid-September to look into the firing of Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch , suggesting additional witnesses needed to be called .
A good time to release this information — if it needed to be released , that is — would have been four months ago or during the House ’ s impeachment proceedings .
These tactics of deploying information late to create “ bombshell ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Republican senators — perhaps with the exception of Mitt Romney , who didn ’ t even learn this lesson after he was called a racist , hair-raping woman murderer during his presidential bid — are finally wising up to the operation played by the media and Democrats .
The media always owned this impeachment process .
Pelosi did her best to avoid impeachment but the media all but forced her into it .
They championed it every step of the way and provided help , including the blocking of arguments against it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s fairly standard to name whistleblowers and to do journalism figuring out who key players are , many in the media decided to help Democrats keep from having to answer questions about his role with the whistleblower .
They steadfastly avoided looking into him and his motivations or how that might have affected the entire proceedings .
Each day provided evidence that the media didn ’ t just want Trump impeached and removed from office , but desperately wanted that .
There are videos of scrums of reporters fighting with Republicans over their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Democrats .
Republican senators are hounded by reporters to pressure them to change their vote , but Democratic senators don ’ t receive the same treatment .
It didn ’ t help that in the midst of the circus , a CNN host and his panel were openly yukking it up about how Republicans are all stupid .

President Donald Trump will not be removed from office following his impeachment by the House of Representatives and a trial in the Senate. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has reportedly told colleagues they have the votes to finish things this week.
Whether the senators put the trial out of its misery this week or drag it on for months, the outcome is a foregone conclusion. Here are the eight big reasons why Trump won impeachment.
1. Trump Didn’t Commit An Impeachable Offense
It’s an obvious point, but the most important point.
Impeaching President Trump has been the stated goal of the Resistance since his inauguration. The main effort toward impeachment was through the investigation of a false and dangerous theory of treasonous collusion with Russia to steal the 2016 election.
Even with a limitless special counsel appointed to achieve that end, the Russia collusion hoax ended with not a single American found to have colluded with Russia, not to mention anyone close to Trump, or Trump himself. A mini-effort to get impeachment going — on the special counsel’s murky near-findings that Trump had objected too strenuously to being falsely accused of treason — also fell apart.
Other impeachment efforts for, among other things, mean tweets, went nowhere. With time running out, the Resistance cobbled together what was always a weak theory regarding a phone call with the Ukrainian president.
At first the alleged crime was supposed to be a campaign finance violation, then bribery, then extortion. It ended with two articles of impeachment, neither ofor an actual crime, and one a more or less laughable claim that the president can’t use courts to defend his rights.
The other was a complicated argument regarding abuse of power that required not just hiding all exonerating evidence but the worst possible construction on what remained. It was such a weak argument that not a single Republican in the House fell for it and three Democrats declined to go along with their own party.
The range of opinion outside the Resistance about the phone call between world leaders ranges from it being, in Trump’s words, “perfect” to merely good or fine to not good. Resistance members tried to put forth the claim that the call was none of these things but impeachably bad. Even with the help of a compliant media, there is simply not enough consensus around this extreme viewpoint to justify even censure, much less bipartisan agreement toward impeachment, much less a removal from office.
Trump’s avoidance of a crime or any real break with public trust is the single biggest factor in his acquittal.
2. Terrible Decision-Making By House Democrats
With a histrionic media and political base spending the last few years demanding impeachment, House Democrats surely had hoped that President Trump would do something justifying an impeachment inquiry. They undoubtedly were not pleased when the best they had to work with was Trump asking for help investigating Ukraine’s known 2016 election meddling or investigation into Biden family corruption in Ukraine.
So they started with a weak hand. But they failed to follow a good process. They didn’t have the House authorize an impeachment inquiry until late in the process. This decision made it unlikely that the many early subpoenas they sought would be deemed valid by a court of law if contested.
They refused to have courts validate their subpoenas, refused to let the GOP call their own witnesses, and suppressed information that was not helpful to their impeachment cause. Of the 78 days of the impeachment proceedings, they denied the president any right to counsel or due process for 71 days of them.
In general, the procedure was rushed and information that could have helped them seem more credible was never sought or acquired.
3. Democrats Failed to Get a Single Republican on Board Their Impeachment Scheme
It is nothing short of amazing that not a single Republican member of Congress joined with Democrats in their impeachment effort. There are plenty of Republican members who either dislike or even loathe the president. But even they didn’t find the impeachment to be credible.
The Resistance was also failed by its NeverTrump wing. That wing had pushed Justin Amash to dramatically leave the Republican Party earlier last year. He published his op-ed as to why and promptly lost any sway with anyone other than the tiny NeverTrump movement.
NeverTrump has long demonstrated trouble with strategic thinking and impulse control, so following their advice and leaving the party in a snit was an unforced error. Had Amash stayed with the party, the Resistance in the media and Democratic Party would have been able to make much more use of him.
4. Inexplicable 1-Month Delay In Sending Impeachment to the Senate
A main argument in favor of impeaching President Trump was that the situation, whatever it was supposed to be that day, was so dire that it required his immediate removal from office. The House Democrats couldn’t afford to wait a matter of months until a new election would be held and Americans could decide whether the “perfect” phone call was in fact so bad that it required the first removal from office of an American president in history.
Impeachment and removal had to happen immediately, they claimed. But then after voting to impeach the president, perhaps sensing the problems caused by a weak case and hoping for more information to come to light, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi inexplicably sat on the articles for a month. It killed whatever momentum the Resistance had and made a mockery of the whole process.
5. The Defense Team Was Amazing
Instead of turning things over to the effective Republicans who had handled the impeachment process so well on the House side, President Trump instead opted to put together a powerhouse collection of attorneys uniquely suited to address an audience of senators and the American people.
Even among their class of politicians, senators have an extremely high view of themselves and their office. Every senator’s ego must be stroked. They don’t want to feel upstaged, spoken down to, or lectured.
Patrick Philbin, Trump’s deputy general counsel, exemplified the defense team’s deliberate choice to put in front of senators someone who had encyclopedic knowledge of the law and this particular case, someone not there to make a name for himself. Philbin’s humble and bookish demeanor was neither bombastic nor flamboyant as he calmly explained the facts of the case and their significance. The other members of the team were also well chosen to argue their points.
6. Grating and Juvenile House Managers
By contrast, House Democrats picked impeachment managers who seemed perfectly calibrated to annoy and grate on those handful of senators whose votes were up for grabs. Reps. Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler were the leaders of a group that repeated their highly partisan talking points and used hyperbolic and loaded language. The media loved it, but it went over like a lead balloon with the non-Resistance senators.
The House Democrats accused senators of being cowards who were complicit in a cover-up. They suggested that the senators were unable to vote properly because President Trump would put their heads on pikes if they didn’t vote to acquit. They refused to answer specific and direct questions about whether the whistleblower worked for Biden, was involved in any decisions regarding Burisma, or about his interaction with Schiff’s staff. Even the Washington Post — even the Washington Post — gave Schiff four Pinocchios for lying about his staff’s secret collusion with the whistleblower.
At some point, the difference between the competent and highly skilled attorneys on the White House team and the bumbling and somewhat mediocre team of House managers was so pronounced it was almost embarrassing. It was as if one side belonged in front of the Supreme Court and the other failed to make the finals at a middle school debate tournament.
7. Kavanaugh Smear Operations No Longer Work
Along with the delay of the articles of impeachment, the House managers deployed a slow drip of supposedly damaging information. First they put Lev Parnas out as a “bombshell” witness who would bring Trump down. Parnas is indicted for various crimes and is something of a hustler and influence peddler who worked his way through Washington and supposedly had some type of negative information about Trump.
While the argument that Rudy Guiliani shouldn’t have been working with him in any way has merit, it’s a difficult argument to make while walking hand-in-hand with the same individual. Senate Minority Leader went so far as to invite Parnas to be his guest at the trial, which made the scene look more like a circus than a deliberative effort.
Late this week, House Foreign Affairs Chairman Eliot Engel issued a press release saying that he had been given information from a disgruntled former employee of Trump’s in mid-September to look into the firing of Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch, suggesting additional witnesses needed to be called. A good time to release this information — if it needed to be released, that is — would have been four months ago or during the House’s impeachment proceedings.
These tactics of deploying information late to create “bombshell” news stories are losing their effectiveness post-Kavanaugh. Republican senators — perhaps with the exception of Mitt Romney, who didn’t even learn this lesson after he was called a racist, hair-raping woman murderer during his presidential bid — are finally wising up to the operation played by the media and Democrats.
8. Media Malfeasance
The media always owned this impeachment process. Pelosi did her best to avoid impeachment but the media all but forced her into it. They championed it every step of the way and provided help, including the blocking of arguments against it.
For instance, although it’s fairly standard to name whistleblowers and to do journalism figuring out who key players are, many in the media decided to help Democrats keep from having to answer questions about his role with the whistleblower. They steadfastly avoided looking into him and his motivations or how that might have affected the entire proceedings.
Each day provided evidence that the media didn’t just want Trump impeached and removed from office, but desperately wanted that. There are videos of scrums of reporters fighting with Republicans over their case, but none of them fighting with Democrats. Republican senators are hounded by reporters to pressure them to change their vote, but Democratic senators don’t receive the same treatment.
It didn’t help that in the midst of the circus, a CNN host and his panel were openly yukking it up about how Republicans are all stupid.


thelibertydaily--2020-01-30--Leftist MSNBC Hack Completely Loses It, Ridiculously Claims President Trump Will Shut Down Voting in

Leftist MSNBC Hack Completely Loses It, Ridiculously Claims President Trump Will Shut Down Voting in California if Acquitted

You may not realize this yet , but if Trump is acquitted of impeachment , he will use the iron fist of government to do whatever he wants , including shutting down elections in California to keep illegals from voting .
At least that ’ s what an MSNBC contributor says will happen : Apparently having a vision of the future , Johnson , politics editor for TheRoot.com , feared : “ Imagine Donald Trump deciding sometime in June , ‘ Well , I heard this conspiracy theory that a lot of illegal immigrants voted in California , so I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election California has to undergo extreme vetting because we can ’ t trust their votes .
We ’ re going to shut down voting in a state.
’ ” Johnson insisted it would happen : “ This is literally the kind of thing he will do now .
We ’ re not talking hypotheticals anymore.
” He pleaded with senators to convict the President : “ So why people aren ’ t concerned , why people don ’ t realize that this is step one to actual autocracy ?
Not the theoretical one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in class , but an actual president who will say , “ This state ’ s votes don ’ t count .
These people don ’ t have a right to vote .
These people can ’ t come into the country.
” That is what they ’ re allowing to happen here.
” This is unbelievably absurd and indicative of just how much these people hate Trump and want to destroy him .
These fears might be a tad more understandable if this were 2016 and Trump wasn ’ t a known @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president for over three years and has never used the power of government to do anything outside his constitutional authority .
In fact even when the courts rule against him , he always obeys their rulings and keeps fighting within the court system , which is more than we can say for his predecessor who was held in contempt by the courts for ignoring their rulings .
This is just unhinged hatred and fear mongering that should be reason enough for MSNBC to boot him off the network .
But they won ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him , which is utterly pathetic .

You may not realize this yet, but if Trump is acquitted of impeachment, he will use the iron fist of government to do whatever he wants, including shutting down elections in California to keep illegals from voting. At least that’s what an MSNBC contributor says will happen:
Newsbusters writes:
Apparently having a vision of the future, Johnson, politics editor for TheRoot.com, feared: “Imagine Donald Trump deciding sometime in June, ‘Well, I heard this conspiracy theory that a lot of illegal immigrants voted in California, so I’ve decided that during the presidential election California has to undergo extreme vetting because we can’t trust their votes. We’re going to shut down voting in a state.’” Johnson insisted it would happen: “This is literally the kind of thing he will do now. We’re not talking hypotheticals anymore.” He pleaded with senators to convict the President: “So why people aren’t concerned, why people don’t realize that this is step one to actual autocracy? Not the theoretical one, not the one we talk about in class, but an actual president who will say, “This state’s votes don’t count. These people don’t have a right to vote. These people can’t come into the country.” That is what they’re allowing to happen here.”
This is unbelievably absurd and indicative of just how much these people hate Trump and want to destroy him.
These fears might be a tad more understandable if this were 2016 and Trump wasn’t a known quantity. But he’s been president for over three years and has never used the power of government to do anything outside his constitutional authority. In fact even when the courts rule against him, he always obeys their rulings and keeps fighting within the court system, which is more than we can say for his predecessor who was held in contempt by the courts for ignoring their rulings.
This is just unhinged hatred and fear mongering that should be reason enough for MSNBC to boot him off the network. But they won’t because they probably all agree with him, which is utterly pathetic.


thelibertydaily--2020-01-30--Surgical Masks Sold Out Across UK Amidst Coronavirus Fears

Surgical masks have almost sold out across the United Kingdom over fears of coronavirus despite the fact that there hasn ’ t been a single confirmed case of it in the country .
Pharmacy retailer Boots says that its six-pack of “ safe & sound ” surgical face masks is sold out , as is another box of 50 masks .
The company said it was “ working to make additional stock available for customers to purchase in store and on boots.com which we hope will land over the next week.
” One mask still available for sale on Amazon.co.uk @ @ @ @ @ @ @ though most others on the website are completely out of stock .
Branches of B & Q , a hardware chain , are also reporting that they are selling out of dust masks , with shelves in one London store being empty .
Wynne Lloyd-Williams of Cymru Healthcare , a medical supply firm told the BBC , “ We ’ ve seen a dramatic increase in demand.
” “ This is unusual .
They are not a significant product , but people now are thinking ‘ should we purchase them ? '
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do not offer complete protection against airborne viruses although they do help with preventing hand to mouth infections .
N95 respirators , a stronger type of mask designed to filter out pollutants , offer more protection than ordinary surgical masks but also make breathing more difficult .
As we reported earlier , a model that predicts the number of coronavirus infections that will occur if the outbreak isn ’ t contained shows that based on current projections , there will be over 183 million infections before the end of February .
My voice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever .
It is CRUCIAL that you support me .
Please sign up for the free newsletter here .
Donate to me on SubscribeStar here .
Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown .

Surgical masks have almost sold out across the United Kingdom over fears of coronavirus despite the fact that there hasn’t been a single confirmed case of it in the country.
Pharmacy retailer Boots says that its six-pack of “safe & sound” surgical face masks is sold out, as is another box of 50 masks.
The company said it was “working to make additional stock available for customers to purchase in store and on boots.com which we hope will land over the next week.”
One mask still available for sale on Amazon.co.uk is retailing for a whopping £99.99, though most others on the website are completely out of stock.
Branches of B&Q, a hardware chain, are also reporting that they are selling out of dust masks, with shelves in one London store being empty.
Wynne Lloyd-Williams of Cymru Healthcare, a medical supply firm told the BBC, “We’ve seen a dramatic increase in demand.”
“This is unusual. They are not a significant product, but people now are thinking ‘should we purchase them?'” he added.
Virologists say the masks do not offer complete protection against airborne viruses although they do help with preventing hand to mouth infections.
N95 respirators, a stronger type of mask designed to filter out pollutants, offer more protection than ordinary surgical masks but also make breathing more difficult.
As we reported earlier, a model that predicts the number of coronavirus infections that will occur if the outbreak isn’t contained shows that based on current projections, there will be over 183 million infections before the end of February.
SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:
Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet
———————————————————————————————————————
My voice is being silenced by free speech-hating Silicon Valley behemoths who want me disappeared forever. It is CRUCIAL that you support me.
Please sign up for the free newsletter here. Donate to me on SubscribeStar here.
Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.
———————————————————————————————————————


thelibertydaily--2020-01-30--Kanye West Brings Sunday Service to Miami Ahead of Super Bowl

Kanye West isn ’ t performing the halftime show at the Super Bowl this year , but he is bringing his Sunday Service experience to Miami the morning of the big game .
The famed rapper-turned-gospel artist will be hosting his service in concert with Miami ’ s VOUS Church a mere 30 minutes away from the Hard Rock Stadium , where Super Bowl LIV will take place .
West ’ s event will be held at Bayfront Park Amphitheater at 11 a.m. Sunday , hours before the San Francisco 49ers and Kansas City Chiefs kick-off at 6:30 p.m. Rich @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the service .
He has a longtime connection to the Wests , having officiated the Kanye ’ s wedding to TV personality Kim Kardashian in May 2014 .
“ He ’ s been a faithful friend who has encouraged me , who ’ s believed in me , seen things in me that I didn ’ t see in myself , ” Wilkerson said of West .
Earlier this week , West organized a last-minute service following the tragic death of NBA star Kobe Bryant and 13-year-old daughter Gianna , both of whom @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Calabasas , California , on Sunday .

Kanye West isn’t performing the halftime show at the Super Bowl this year, but he is bringing his Sunday Service experience to Miami the morning of the big game.
The famed rapper-turned-gospel artist will be hosting his service in concert with Miami’s VOUS Church a mere 30 minutes away from the Hard Rock Stadium, where Super Bowl LIV will take place.
This Sunday only, we’ll be gathering for one service at Bayfront Park for a special Sunday Service with Kanye West. Sermon by Pastor @richwilkersonjr.
Confirm your ticket: https://t.co/RokNUx3M4R
We will not be gathering at our regular locations. pic.twitter.com/Mx8rfvh6yc — VOUS Church (@VousChurch) January 29, 2020
West’s event will be held at Bayfront Park Amphitheater at 11 a.m. Sunday, hours before the San Francisco 49ers and Kansas City Chiefs kick-off at 6:30 p.m.
Rich Wilkerson, Jr., will preach during the service. He has a longtime connection to the Wests, having officiated the Kanye’s wedding to TV personality Kim Kardashian in May 2014.
“He’s been a faithful friend who has encouraged me, who’s believed in me, seen things in me that I didn’t see in myself,” Wilkerson said of West.
Earlier this week, West organized a last-minute service following the tragic death of NBA star Kobe Bryant and 13-year-old daughter Gianna, both of whom were killed in a helicopter crash in Calabasas, California, on Sunday.
West posted a tweet Sunday evening in honor of Bryant:


thelibertydaily--2020-01-31--The Epstein Effect? Rand Paul’s Relevant Impeachment Question Disallowed by Obamacare-Loving, Bush-A

The Epstein Effect? Rand Paul’s Relevant Impeachment Question Disallowed by Obamacare-Loving, Bush-Appointed Chief Justice John Roberts; Has The Chief Justice Been Compromised?

On Thursday Chief Justice John Roberts disallowed this question from Senator Rand Paul at the Senate Impeachment hearings : To the Manager Schiff and counsel for the President : Manager Schiff and Counsel for the President , are you aware that House Intelligence Committee staffer Shawn Misko had a close relationship with Eric Ciaramella when at the National Security Council together , and are you aware and how do you respond to reports that Ciaramella and Misko may have worked together to plot impeaching the President before there were formal House impeachment proceedings ?
” Why is that question NOT @ @ @ @ @ @ @ poll - story continues below Sen. Rand Paul ( R-KY ) opened Thursday ’ s impeachment trial proceedings with one of the first submitted questions for the record , but Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts refused to read the question to the Democrat impeachment managers and President Donald Trump ’ s counsel .
The text of the question to Rep. Adam Schiff ( D-CA ) and Trump ’ s counsel , as Paul submitted it to Roberts , was subsequently obtained by Breitbart News .
The text of Sen. Paul ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the senator ’ s office confirmed to Breitbart News , was : To the Manager Schiff and counsel for the President : Manager Schiff and Counsel for the President , are you aware that House Intelligence Committee staffer Shawn Misko had a close relationship with Eric Ciaramella when at the National Security Council together , and are you aware and how do you respond to reports that Ciaramella and Misko may have worked together to plot impeaching the President before there were formal House impeachment proceedings ?
” In the question , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a CIA analyst who has been widely reported to be the “ whistleblower ” whose complaint launched the Democrats ’ impeachment proceedings , as the “ whistleblower.
” But Roberts has now multiple times throughout the trial censored any mention of Ciaramella ’ s name , despite his direct involvement in these matters .
Paul also tweeted this after the fact : I am not qualified to pass legal judgment , but it seemed like a very fair and very pertinent question .
However , Chief Justice John Roberts has surprised us before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Roberts and the Obamacare ruling , if you will .
From The inside story of how John Roberts negotiated to save Obamacare… Republicans in Congress had been fighting the law dubbed Obamacare at every turn for two years , and all the GOP presidential candidates in 2012 had vowed to repeal it .
And now Roberts , a nominee of President George W. Bush , had saved it .
Going forward , the chief justice would be viewed with skepticism by conservatives , despite also having taken the lead on limiting racial remedies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign finance regulations and voting for stronger Second Amendment gun rights .
Roberts ’ moves behind the scenes were as extraordinary as his ruling .
He changed course multiple times .
He was part of the majority of justices who initially voted in a private conference to strike down the individual insurance mandate — the heart of the law — but he also voted to uphold an expansion of Medicaid for people near the poverty line .
Two months later , Roberts had shifted on both .
The final tallies , 5-4 to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ curtail the Medicaid plan , came after weeks of negotiations and trade-offs among the justices .
For those of us who remember The Obamacare debate and Roberts ’ stunning reversal , we have questioned his ethics ever since .
Since that time a very interesting document surfaced and Chief Justice Roberts was quick to deny it was , in fact , him listed on that document .
There is no question that there are many men named John Roberts in this world , so there is no way to prove it was our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , denied that he flew on The Lolita Express .
Even if it were him , you wouldn ’ t expect him to admit it would you ?
There is zero proof that Chief Justice John Roberts did , in fact , fly on The Lolita Express .
But keeping in mind that Epstein allegedly catered to VIP types ( like Bill Clinton , Bill Gates , Joe Biden , John McCain , Prince Andrew and Jeff Bezos ) would anyone be able to say WITH 100 % CERTAINTY that it was not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A lot of things would seem to suddenly make sense if he was .
Again , we have no proof that this is the same John Roberts but , that is a damn good question .
If it was Chief Justice John Roberts on that flight , none of his actions should surprise us from here on out .
However , as usual , we will likely never know .
Dean Garrison is Publisher of DC Clothesline and DC Dirty Laundry

On Thursday Chief Justice John Roberts disallowed this question from Senator Rand Paul at the Senate Impeachment hearings:
To the Manager Schiff and counsel for the President:
Manager Schiff and Counsel for the President, are you aware that House Intelligence Committee staffer Shawn Misko had a close relationship with Eric Ciaramella when at the National Security Council together, and are you aware and how do you respond to reports that Ciaramella and Misko may have worked together to plot impeaching the President before there were formal House impeachment proceedings?”
take our poll - story continues below
Completing this poll grants you access to DC Clothesline updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Why is that question NOT relevant to the proceedings?
Here’s more from Breitbart:
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) opened Thursday’s impeachment trial proceedings with one of the first submitted questions for the record, but Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts refused to read the question to the Democrat impeachment managers and President Donald Trump’s counsel.
The text of the question to Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Trump’s counsel, as Paul submitted it to Roberts, was subsequently obtained by Breitbart News. The text of Sen. Paul’s Thursday question exactly as submitted to Roberts, the senator’s office confirmed to Breitbart News, was:
To the Manager Schiff and counsel for the President:
Manager Schiff and Counsel for the President, are you aware that House Intelligence Committee staffer Shawn Misko had a close relationship with Eric Ciaramella when at the National Security Council together, and are you aware and how do you respond to reports that Ciaramella and Misko may have worked together to plot impeaching the President before there were formal House impeachment proceedings?”
In the question, Paul does not identify Eric Ciaramella, a CIA analyst who has been widely reported to be the “whistleblower” whose complaint launched the Democrats’ impeachment proceedings, as the “whistleblower.”
But Roberts has now multiple times throughout the trial censored any mention of Ciaramella’s name, despite his direct involvement in these matters.
Paul also tweeted this after the fact:
My question is not about a “whistleblower” as I have no independent information on his identity. My question is about the actions of known Obama partisans within the NSC and House staff and how they are reported to have conspired before impeachment proceedings had even begun. — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) January 30, 2020
More at Breitbart…
#####
Indeed.
You Might Like
I am not qualified to pass legal judgment, but it seemed like a very fair and very pertinent question.
However, Chief Justice John Roberts has surprised us before.
Let’s think back to Roberts and the Obamacare ruling, if you will.
From The inside story of how John Roberts negotiated to save Obamacare…
Republicans in Congress had been fighting the law dubbed Obamacare at every turn for two years, and all the GOP presidential candidates in 2012 had vowed to repeal it. And now Roberts, a nominee of President George W. Bush, had saved it.
Going forward, the chief justice would be viewed with skepticism by conservatives, despite also having taken the lead on limiting racial remedies and voting rights, helping roll back campaign finance regulations and voting for stronger Second Amendment gun rights.
Roberts’ moves behind the scenes were as extraordinary as his ruling. He changed course multiple times. He was part of the majority of justices who initially voted in a private conference to strike down the individual insurance mandate — the heart of the law — but he also voted to uphold an expansion of Medicaid for people near the poverty line.
Two months later, Roberts had shifted on both.
The final tallies, 5-4 to uphold the individual mandate and 7-2 to curtail the Medicaid plan, came after weeks of negotiations and trade-offs among the justices.
More…
#####
For those of us who remember The Obamacare debate and Roberts’ stunning reversal, we have questioned his ethics ever since.
Since that time a very interesting document surfaced and Chief Justice Roberts was quick to deny it was, in fact, him listed on that document.
There is no question that there are many men named John Roberts in this world, so there is no way to prove it was our Chief Justice.
He, of course, denied that he flew on The Lolita Express.
To anyone who thinks this might be me, I did not know Epstein, never met him, and certainly never flew on any of his aircraft. pic.twitter.com/sakGSDZTE4 — John Roberts (@johnrobertsFox) August 14, 2019
Even if it were him, you wouldn’t expect him to admit it would you?
There is zero proof that Chief Justice John Roberts did, in fact, fly on The Lolita Express.
But keeping in mind that Epstein allegedly catered to VIP types (like Bill Clinton, Bill Gates, Joe Biden, John McCain, Prince Andrew and Jeff Bezos) would anyone be able to say WITH 100% CERTAINTY that it was not our Chief Justice on that flight?
A lot of things would seem to suddenly make sense if he was.
Again, we have no proof that this is the same John Roberts but, that is a damn good question.
If it was Chief Justice John Roberts on that flight, none of his actions should surprise us from here on out.
However, as usual, we will likely never know.
Dean Garrison is Publisher of DC Clothesline and DC Dirty Laundry


thelibertydaily--2020-01-31--Nervous Nancy Pelosi Wants Trump Defense Team Lawyers Disbarred for Being A ‘Disgrace’

You have to wonder how Democrats like Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff sleep at night .
They know what they are doing is wrong , but keep pushing forward as if they are doing the right thing for the country .
Here ’ s the latest from the Pelosi , via The Hill : Pelosi barked , “ I don ’ t know how they can retain their lawyer status , in the comments that they ’ re making.
” Trending : Trump Tweets ‘ Game Over ’ After Old Clips of John Bolton & Adam Schiff Resurface [ Watch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ made Wednesday evening by Alan Dershowitz , a celebrity lawyer on Trump ’ s legal team , who asserted on the Senate floor that presidents can not be impeached for actions designed to boost their reelections — if they believe that retaining a grip on the White House is in the best interest of the country .
And “ every public official I know , ” he added , considers that to be the case .
take our poll - story continues below For Nancy to compare the shoddy impeachment inquiry into Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ insinuate that the two events are similar , is ming-boggling .
And yet , Nancy went ahead and did it .
She knows the media will back her up .
They ’ ll find a way to justify her words , even if it means creating their own facts .
They ’ re good at that .
The revolutionary war was fought bc of ppl like her .
Ppl who want to take power away from others and give no voice is what brought us to that point .
CONFIRMED : Pelosi informs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ floor vote to launch the impeachment inquiry Schiff says Republicans “ have completely been represented ” in these closed-door depositions .
They have attended and ask questions .
“ There is full participation by the GOP ” He says that he anticipates releasing transcripts

You have to wonder how Democrats like Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff sleep at night. They know what they are doing is wrong, but keep pushing forward as if they are doing the right thing for the country. Here’s the latest from Pelosi, via The Hill:
Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Thursday hammered the lawyers leading President Trump’s impeachment defense, saying they’ve trampled on the Constitution while questioning how they’ve been allowed to keep their licenses.
Pelosi barked, “I don’t know how they can retain their lawyer status, in the comments that they’re making.”
Pelosi was responding largely to comments made Wednesday evening by Alan Dershowitz, a celebrity lawyer on Trump’s legal team, who asserted on the Senate floor that presidents cannot be impeached for actions designed to boost their reelections — if they believe that retaining a grip on the White House is in the best interest of the country. And “every public official I know,” he added, considers that to be the case.
For Nancy to compare the shoddy impeachment inquiry into Trump to the Revolutionary War, to even insinuate that the two events are similar, is ming-boggling.
And yet, Nancy went ahead and did it.
She knows the media will back her up. They’ll find a way to justify her words, even if it means creating their own facts. They’re good at that.
WATCH:
Nancy Pelosi compares Democrats’ impeachment inquiry to the American Revolution War
Nancy Pelosi compares Democrats’ impeachment inquiry to the American Revolution War pic.twitter.com/CDXlQDktn1 — Ryan Saavedra (@RealSaavedra) October 17, 2019
Reaction:
The revolutionary war was fought bc of ppl like her. Ppl who want to take power away from others and give no voice is what brought us to that point.
The revolutionary war was fought bc of ppl like her. Ppl who want to take power away from others and give no voice is what brought us to that point. — Ryan Marowitz (@ryanlm92) October 17, 2019
CONFIRMED: Pelosi informs caucus there will NOT be a formal floor vote to launch the impeachment inquiry
CONFIRMED: Pelosi informs caucus there will NOT be a formal floor vote to launch the impeachment inquiry — Scott Wong (@scottwongDC) October 15, 2019
Schiff says Republicans “have completely been represented” in these closed-door depositions. They have attended and ask questions.
“There is full participation by the GOP”
He says that he anticipates releasing transcripts
Schiff says Republicans "have completely been represented" in these closed-door depositions. They have attended and ask questions. "There is full participation by the GOP" He says that he anticipates releasing transcripts — Scott Wong (@scottwongDC) October 15, 2019
Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success!


thelibertydaily--2020-01-31--Chief Justice John Roberts Stares Down Pocahontas After She Asks Question Attacking His Character

Elizabeth Warren asked a question that was so blatantly out of line on Thursday , it forced Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts to stare daggers at the 2020 Democrat presidential nominee .
Roberts was not thrilled in the slightest and it isn ’ t hard to see why .
See for yourself , via Daily Wire : take our poll - story continues below Schiff said , “ Senator , I would not say that it contributes to a loss of confidence in the chief justice .
I think the chief justice has presided admirably.
” There is undeniable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ private schools .
And yet , the far-left multi-millionaire gets caught , on camera , saying her kids didn ’ t go to private schools .
Why would she lie like this ?
Is it because like all other Democrat Socialists she attempts to keep her uninformed fans in the dark ?
Yup .
That ’ s what it is .
The problem is that Warren can say whatever she wants and get away with it because she has the media on her side .
Thanks , Obama .
Holy shit .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she sent her kids to school .
Sarah Carpenter : “ I read that your children went to private schools ” Warren : “ No my children went to public schools ” Warren was confronted by an activist for sending her son to a private school , and denied doing so .
Then she admitted to the  @ FreeBeacon that she sent her son to private school beginning in 5th grade .
Holy shit .
I ’ m the first to figure it out .
I ’ m nearly certain Elizabeth Warren @ @ @ @ @ @ @ school in Austin Texas ( Kirby Hall School ) .
Warren has been trying to cover this up since she fights against school choice .
I found this yearbook entry for Alex Warren ( born in 1976 ) .
It ’ s the only one .
It ’ s Kirby Hall School .
A private school right next to UT in Austin Texas ( where Warren was teaching ) .
Here ’ s the ONLY family photo I could find of Alex on the internet ( left ) .
The other photo was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He is now 43 .
Tuition is currently almost $ 18,000 per year .
I do not blame Alex one bit for attending a private school in 5th grade .
Good for him .
This is about Warren exercising school choice for her own kids while fighting hard to prevent other families from having that option .

Elizabeth Warren asked a question that was so blatantly out of line on Thursday, it forced Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts to stare daggers at the 2020 Democrat presidential nominee. Roberts was not thrilled in the slightest and it isn’t hard to see why. See for yourself, via Daily Wire:
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) was stared down on Thursday by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts after she asked an absurd partisan question that attacked Roberts’ character.
WATCH:
John Roberts was NOT happy with @EWarren's nasty question about whether the legitimacy of SCOTUS (and Roberts himself) would be sullied if there are no witnesses in the Senate trial pic.twitter.com/60fbiME3Db — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 30, 2020
The question was so absurd that even House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, who is serving as one of the Democrats’ impeachment managers, pushed back on the question and defended Roberts.
Schiff said, “Senator, I would not say that it contributes to a loss of confidence in the chief justice. I think the chief justice has presided admirably.“
Reactions:
As @pkcapitol notes, the seeming attack on Roberts came a day ahead of a potential tie vote where Dems have been courting Roberts to intervene. Pelosi very solicitous today; D sens uniformly respectful. — Mike DeBonis (@mikedebonis) January 30, 2020
[ring ring] W: Elena!
K: What have done?
W: What do you mean?
K: He was gonna vote to release Trump’s taxes.
W: So?
K: “So?”
W: That Q was FTW!
K: I *had* him. You pushed him away.
W: Whatevever. I’m gonna pack the court. Make you de facto Chief!
K: We wish. [click] — Mike Sacks (@MikeSacksEsq) January 30, 2020
I agree with this. The question reflects badly on Warren. The exchange, however, reflects well on Schiff—as well as on Roberts. https://t.co/whvFp76ren — Benjamin Wittes (@benjaminwittes) January 30, 2020
Video: Major yikes for @EWarren on @CNN just now as panel led by Erin Burnett universally condemned her nasty question about the legitimacy of the Supreme Court and Chief Justice John Roberts being sullied if the impeachment trial ends without witnesses pic.twitter.com/Noj9QnOQ4I — Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) January 31, 2020
There is undeniable proof that Elizabeth sent her children to private schools. And yet, the far-left multi-millionaire gets caught, on camera, saying her kids didn’t go to private schools.
Why would she lie like this?
Is it because like all other Democrat Socialists she attempts to keep her uninformed fans in the dark? Yup.
That’s what it is.
The problem is that Warren can say whatever she wants and get away with it because she has the media on her side. Thanks, Obama.
WATCH:
Holy shit. I have Warren on video lying about where she sent her kids to school.
Sarah Carpenter: “I read that your children went to private schools”
Warren: “No my children went to public schools”
Holy shit. I have Warren on video lying about where she sent her kids to school. Sarah Carpenter: "I read that your children went to private schools" Warren: "No my children went to public schools" pic.twitter.com/PEHr3jNvjx — Corey A. DeAngelis (@DeAngelisCorey) November 22, 2019
Reactions:
Warren was confronted by an activist for sending her son to a private school, and denied doing so.
Then she admitted to the @FreeBeacon that she sent her son to private school beginning in 5th grade.
Warren was confronted by an activist for sending her son to a private school, and denied doing so. Then she admitted to the @FreeBeacon that she sent her son to private school beginning in 5th grade. https://t.co/eeQD8Bem3g — Brent Scher (@BrentScher) November 23, 2019
Holy shit. I’m the first to figure it out.
I’m nearly certain Elizabeth Warren sent her son to an expensive private school in Austin Texas (Kirby Hall School).
Warren has been trying to cover this up since she fights against school choice.
Holy shit. I'm the first to figure it out. I'm nearly certain Elizabeth Warren sent her son to an expensive private school in Austin Texas (Kirby Hall School). Warren has been trying to cover this up since she fights against school choice. — Corey A. DeAngelis (@DeAngelisCorey) October 29, 2019
I found this yearbook entry for Alex Warren (born in 1976). It’s the only one.
It’s Kirby Hall School. A private school right next to UT in Austin Texas (where Warren was teaching).
I found this yearbook entry for Alex Warren (born in 1976). It's the only one. It's Kirby Hall School. A private school right next to UT in Austin Texas (where Warren was teaching). pic.twitter.com/q4ACGb3Ncq — Corey A. DeAngelis (@DeAngelisCorey) October 29, 2019
Here’s the ONLY family photo I could find of Alex on the internet (left).
The other photo was from the school yearbook (right).
He is now 43.
Here's the ONLY family photo I could find of Alex on the internet (left). The other photo was from the school yearbook (right).
He is now 43. pic.twitter.com/I8RHDIA9JD — Corey A. DeAngelis (@DeAngelisCorey) October 29, 2019
Here’s information on the school.
Private.
Tuition is currently almost $18,000 per year.
Here's information on the school. Private. Tuition is currently almost $18,000 per year. pic.twitter.com/TKAqtWiBS7 — Corey A. DeAngelis (@DeAngelisCorey) October 29, 2019
I do not blame Alex one bit for attending a private school in 5th grade. Good for him.
This is about Warren exercising school choice for her own kids while fighting hard to prevent other families from having that option.
I do not blame Alex one bit for attending a private school in 5th grade. Good for him. This is about Warren exercising school choice for her own kids while fighting hard to prevent other families from having that option. — Corey A. DeAngelis (@DeAngelisCorey) October 29, 2019
H/T: Twitchy
Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success!


thelibertydaily--2020-01-31--History Teaches Us This is a Prelude to Confiscation: Democrat Bill Requires All Gun Owners to be Fe

History Teaches Us This is a Prelude to Confiscation: Democrat Bill Requires All Gun Owners to be Federally Licensed

In a clear penchant for destroying the Second Amendment , a new Democrat bill was introduced on Thursday .
Democrat Senator Robert Menendez ( D-NJ ) has introduced a bill that requires ALL gun owners to be federally licensed before they can exercise their 2nd amendment right .
Signing on to the bill were Senator Elizabeth Warren ( D-MA ) ( Lie-a-watha ) and Representative Hank Johnson ( D-GA ) ( Guam will tip over ) .
That ’ s not counting the part of the bill that adds high taxes to ammunition and weapons .
Trending : Unhinged : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be acquitted if Senate votes to acquit him ( Video ) First of all , federal background checks are ALREADY required for all gun purchases .
Many of the mass shooters actually passed their background checks , while others were never supposed to have guns in the first place according to the law .
Licensing would do no good whatsoever…except to create an infringement on the 2A .
That ’ s because it ’ s the agenda to disarm ordinary citizens , and has nothing whatever to do with saving lives .
Anti-gunners @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – common sense has nothing to do with it .
The proposal also contains a “ may issue ” wording that could easily be abused , according to Bearing Arms .
Gun control advocates believe that anyone owning a firearm is a risk to public safety .
Let ’ s take a different view , and check the facts : Sounds to me like we should ban cars .
Drivers are supposed to be licensed too…has it saved lives ?
No .
Firearms deaths dropped from 11,006 in 2017 t0 10,265 in 2018 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a handgun , not a rifle ( the Democrats favorite weapon to hate ) .
In 2017 , there were 390 murders with a rifle , but that fell to 297 in 2018 .
( Data from FBI UCR Crime in the U.S. ) .
Anti-gunners continually quote the statistics that there are ‘ 100 gun deaths ’ every day .
Funny , if you take the 2018 number of 10,265 and divide it by 365 , you get a little over 28…not over 100 .
The fight for your rights The bill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Senate , but please pay attention : it ’ s a harbinger of what could happen if the Democrats retake the Senate this year .
Remember : Anti-gunner billionaire Michael Bloomberg is busily using his money to get Democrats elected in certain states .
Buying elections with lavish spending is a problem we should all pay close attention to .
He wants gun control and he wants it now .
Judging from the Virginia debacle from his money being used to switch a gun friendly state to a complete disaster for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not afford to be lazy in this fight .
Make no mistake , this is a fight .
Watch what is happening in your state .
Vote against any candidate that has taken Bloomberg money or voted for these kinds of bills .
Fight for your rights , or they will disappear…never to return .
• None Lindsey Graham to Bob Menendez : What Your Party Has Done Is… • None New Gun Control Bill Wants to Spy on Your Gun Purchases If you haven ’ t checked out and liked our Facebook @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so .
You can also follow us on Twitter at @ co_firing_line .
Please be sure to check out our MeWe page here and check us out at ProAmerica Only here .
If you appreciate independent conservative reports like this , please go here and support us on Patreon and get your conservative pro-Trump gear here .
And while you ’ re at it , be sure to check out our friends at Whatfinger News , the Internet ’ s conservative front-page founded by ex-military !

In a clear penchant for destroying the Second Amendment, a new Democrat bill was introduced on Thursday. Democrat Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) has introduced a bill that requires ALL gun owners to be federally licensed before they can exercise their 2nd amendment right. Signing on to the bill were Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) (Lie-a-watha) and Representative Hank Johnson (D-GA) (Guam will tip over).
The Democrat bill
NJ.com reported,
“Under the legislation, Americans would be required to obtain a federal or state license to buy or own a gun, federal background checks would be required for all gun purchases, military-style assault weapons would be banned, and minimum age to buy a weapon or ammunition would be set at 21.”
That’s not counting the part of the bill that adds high taxes to ammunition and weapons.
First of all, federal background checks are ALREADY required for all gun purchases. Many of the mass shooters actually passed their background checks, while others were never supposed to have guns in the first place according to the law. Licensing would do no good whatsoever…except to create an infringement on the 2A.
That’s because it’s the agenda to disarm ordinary citizens, and has nothing whatever to do with saving lives. Anti-gunners tend to run on straight emotional arguments – common sense has nothing to do with it.
The proposal also contains a “may issue” wording that could easily be abused, according to Bearing Arms.
“‘(i) reliable, articulable, and credible information that the individual has exhibited or engaged in behavior to suggest the individual could potentially create a risk to public safety; or “(ii) other existing factors that suggest that the individual could potentially create a risk to public safety.”
Gun control advocates believe that anyone owning a firearm is a risk to public safety.
Stats
Let’s take a different view, and check the facts:
“Nearly 1.25 million people die in road crashes each year, on average 3,287 deaths a day. An additional 20-50 million are injured or disabled. More than half of all road traffic deaths occur among young adults ages 15-44.” (ASIRT)
Sounds to me like we should ban cars. Drivers are supposed to be licensed too…has it saved lives? No.
Firearms deaths dropped from 11,006 in 2017 t0 10,265 in 2018. The most commonly used firearm is a handgun, not a rifle (the Democrats favorite weapon to hate). In 2017, there were 390 murders with a rifle, but that fell to 297 in 2018. (Data from FBI UCR Crime in the U.S.).
Anti-gunners continually quote the statistics that there are ‘100 gun deaths’ every day. Funny, if you take the 2018 number of 10,265 and divide it by 365, you get a little over 28…not over 100.
The fight for your rights
The bill has little to no chance of passage in the Senate, but please pay attention: it’s a harbinger of what could happen if the Democrats retake the Senate this year.
Remember: Anti-gunner billionaire Michael Bloomberg is busily using his money to get Democrats elected in certain states. Buying elections with lavish spending is a problem we should all pay close attention to. He wants gun control and he wants it now. Judging from the Virginia debacle from his money being used to switch a gun friendly state to a complete disaster for gun owners, we as Americans cannot afford to be lazy in this fight. Make no mistake, this is a fight.
Watch what is happening in your state. Vote against any candidate that has taken Bloomberg money or voted for these kinds of bills. Fight for your rights, or they will disappear…never to return.
H/T Uncle Sam’s Misguided Children
Related:
If you haven’t checked out and liked our Facebook page, please go here and do so. You can also follow us on Twitter at @co_firing_line. Please be sure to check out our MeWe page here and check us out at ProAmerica Only here.
If you appreciate independent conservative reports like this, please go here and support us on Patreon and get your conservative pro-Trump gear here.
And while you’re at it, be sure to check out our friends at Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative front-page founded by ex-military!


thelibertydaily--2020-01-31--What Happened to Her ‘Love’ of the Constitution? Nervous Nancy Falsely Claims President Trump Won’t

What Happened to Her ‘Love’ of the Constitution? Nervous Nancy Falsely Claims President Trump Won’t be Acquitted if the Senate Votes to Acquit Him

On Thursday , House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , D-Calif. , hit peak “ stupid ” when she put forward the notion that President Trump really won ’ t be acquitted if the Senate votes to acquit him .
” Do you think President Trump will be chastened…or will he be emboldened , because the Senate will have acquitted him ?
” a reporter asked .
Her answer was , to put it mildly , curious .
“ He will not be acquitted .
He can not be acquitted if you don ’ t have a trial , ” she said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have a trial , if you don ’ t have witnesses and documentation and that .
I would hope that the senators , if it comes to a tie or if there ’ s a question of hearing testimony or receiving documents would leave it up to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court , Republican-appointed in a Republican Majority court .
I would think that they would have confidence in the Chief Justice of the United States , that is really his title.
” Latest : Unhinged : Nancy Pelosi claims Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to acquit him ( Video ) And as posted to YouTube : She says you do not have a trial if you do not have witnesses and documents ?
She just described the result from the House resolutions .
The entire reason there is a squabble in the Senate over calling witnesses is because the House failed to do its job .
Reaction was pretty much what you ’ d expect : According to ABC News , Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell , R-Ky. , indicated he has the votes to block witnesses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in time for the Super Bowl .
Multiple Republicans tell ABC News they hope to move quickly to a vote to acquit the president as early as Saturday , ahead of his State of the Union address on Tuesday .
ABC News ’ Trish Turner caught up with McConnell as he arrived at the Capitol Thursday morning .
Asked if he has the votes he needs to win the day Friday on witnesses , he responded , “ We ’ ll see what tomorrow brings.
” Then , when asked if he felt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his head and with a sly grin and said , “ I always do.
” • Pelosi THREATENED Every GOP Senator : Allow Witnesses or ‘ Pay A Price ’ ( Video ) • Pelosi Issues Threat : ‘ One Way or Another ’ Trump Will Be Removed From Office ( Video ) • Former Navy SEAL Craig ‘ Sawman ’ Sawyer warns of ‘ gruesome massacre ’ if Trump removed from office If you haven ’ t checked out and liked our Facebook page , please go here and do so .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ at @ co_firing_line .
Facebook , Google and other members of the Silicon Valley Axis of Evil are now doing everything they can to deliberately stifle conservative content online , so please be sure to check out our MeWe page here , check us out at ProAmerica Only and the new social site , Hardcore Conservatives .
If you appreciate independent conservative reports like this , please go here and support us on Patreon and get your conservative pro-Trump gear here .
While you ’ re at it , be sure to check @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Internet ’ s conservative front-page founded by ex-military !
And be sure to check out our friends at Trending Views :

On Thursday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., hit peak “stupid” when she put forward the notion that President Trump really won’t be acquitted if the Senate votes to acquit him.
”Do you think President Trump will be chastened…or will he be emboldened, because the Senate will have acquitted him?” a reporter asked. Her answer was, to put it mildly, curious.
“He will not be acquitted. He cannot be acquitted if you don’t have a trial,” she said. “If you don’t have a trial, if you don’t have witnesses and documentation and that. I would hope that the senators, if it comes to a tie or if there’s a question of hearing testimony or receiving documents would leave it up to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Republican-appointed in a Republican Majority court. I would think that they would have confidence in the Chief Justice of the United States, that is really his title.”
Here’s video as posted to Twitter:
.@SpeakerPelosi: If the Senate votes to aquit Pres. Trump, he “will not be acquitted” pic.twitter.com/3ovJZA1NrX — Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) January 30, 2020
And as posted to YouTube:
Twitchy suggested picking her argument apart “in reverse,” noting:
She says you do not have a trial if you do not have witnesses and documents? She just described the result from the House resolutions. The entire reason there is a squabble in the Senate over calling witnesses is because the House failed to do its job.
Reaction was pretty much what you’d expect:
So, just to recap: The House's impeachment efforts couldn't wait to adjudicate witness subpoenas, but they could stand to wait an extra three weeks after the vote, and now an acquittal won't be legitimate if the Senate doesn't supplement the House's work. Got it. — Nate Madden (@NateOnTheHill) January 30, 2020
17 House wittinesses (18 if you count the ICIG's exculpatory testimony Schiff is refusing to hand over.)… Also, I'm old enough to remember (a few days ago) Nadler and his cohorts delivered carts of relevant documents to the Senate. It's over… She failed! pic.twitter.com/EXLY1eyUFE — {BarkerMom} (@BarkerMom) January 30, 2020
Indeed.
According to ABC News, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., indicated he has the votes to block witnesses, which means this could be over in time for the Super Bowl.
The ABC report added:
Multiple Republicans tell ABC News they hope to move quickly to a vote to acquit the president as early as Saturday, ahead of his State of the Union address on Tuesday. ABC News’ Trish Turner caught up with McConnell as he arrived at the Capitol Thursday morning. Asked if he has the votes he needs to win the day Friday on witnesses, he responded, “We’ll see what tomorrow brings.” Then, when asked if he felt confident about the vote, he turned his head and with a sly grin and said, “I always do.”
Related:
If you haven’t checked out and liked our Facebook page, please go here and do so. You can also follow us on Twitter at @co_firing_line. Facebook, Google and other members of the Silicon Valley Axis of Evil are now doing everything they can to deliberately stifle conservative content online, so please be sure to check out our MeWe page here, check us out at ProAmerica Only and the new social site, Hardcore Conservatives.
If you appreciate independent conservative reports like this, please go here and support us on Patreon and get your conservative pro-Trump gear here.
While you’re at it, be sure to check out our friends at Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative front-page founded by ex-military! And be sure to check out our friends at Trending Views:


thelibertydaily--2020-01-31--Harvard Listed Among 2020 Top 10 ‘Worst-Of-The-Worst’ for Freedom of Speech

Harvard University made an annual list that highlights the worst colleges for free speech in the U.S .
The list is put together by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education ( FIRE ) and includes 10 schools it believes have hampered free speech .
FIRE chooses schools based on documented instances of free speech violations .
This was the fifth time Harvard made the list .
Its transgressions included the fact it blacklisted students who were part of “ single-gender clubs ” from being eligible for certain scholarships , firing a professor for defending Harvey Weinstein and requiring events @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an unbiased moderator .
Harvard ’ s inclusion is particularly notable because it enjoys the esteemed company of Ivy League schools and is considered one of the nation ’ s — and the world ’ s — best colleges .
The top 10 universities listed by FIRE for “ worst-of-the-worst ” for freedom of speech include , in no specific order : In recent years , free speech issues have become a major topic of conversation on campuses across the country .
FIRE says it hopes one day its list — which is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is no longer necessary .
“ Our hope is that one day creating this list will be difficult , not because of the sheer number of contenders , but because of how few colleges and universities are eager to censor , ” said Robert Shibley , FIRE ’ s executive director .

Harvard University made an annual list that highlights the worst colleges for free speech in the U.S.
The list is put together by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) and includes 10 schools it believes have hampered free speech. FIRE chooses schools based on documented instances of free speech violations.
This was the fifth time Harvard made the list. Its transgressions included the fact it blacklisted students who were part of “single-gender clubs” from being eligible for certain scholarships, firing a professor for defending Harvey Weinstein and requiring events with “controversial” speakers to have an unbiased moderator.
Harvard’s inclusion is particularly notable because it enjoys the esteemed company of Ivy League schools and is considered one of the nation’s — and the world’s — best colleges.
Harvard University (Cambridge, Mass.) Harvard administrators’ faces should be crimson with embarrassment after dismissing a faculty dean for joining a criminal defense team, blacklisting its own students, and more. Read more: https://t.co/Pp6s5kzqLk @harvard https://t.co/PTUqh206PY — FIRE (@TheFIREorg) January 29, 2020
The top 10 universities listed by FIRE for “worst-of-the-worst” for freedom of speech include, in no specific order:
Babson College
Doane University
Harvard University
Jones College
Long Island University Post
Middlebury College
Portland State University
Syracuse University
University of Connecticut
University of Scranton
In recent years, free speech issues have become a major topic of conversation on campuses across the country. FIRE says it hopes one day its list — which is used to highlight free speech intrusions — is no longer necessary.
“Our hope is that one day creating this list will be difficult, not because of the sheer number of contenders, but because of how few colleges and universities are eager to censor,” said Robert Shibley, FIRE’s executive director.
Truth and Accuracy
Submit a Correction * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success!
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
Comment Down Below


thelibertydaily--2020-01-31--ESPN Turns Kobe Bryant’s Death Into Shameless Self Promotion

Kobe Bryant ’ s final jersey number will be something this year ’ s ...

There is nothing so broken within ESPN that couldn’t be fixed with a small but well-aimed nuclear warhead.
1. Would ESPN conspicuously and shamelessly exploit the sudden, tragic death of Kobe Bryant for cheap, transparent self-promotion?
Yes. And it did.
2. Would ESPN’s shameless, indecent exploitation of Bryant’s death at least be honest?
No. And it wasn’t.
Sunday, shortly after the world learned Bryant had been killed, ESPN got to work doing what it does — worming in on the story to fabricate its first-with-the-most presence. ESPN posted these graphics:
“Breaking News: Kobe Bryant dies in helicopter crash at age 41. Reports: Lakers legend dies at 41, ESPN’s Adrian Wojnarowski reports (1st reported by TMZ).”
So what did ESPN and Wojnarowski have to do with it? Nothing. It was just another unconscionable ESPN sell of ESPN to an audience it believes too dim to know better.
ESPN’s online reporting of Bryant’s death was no more credible: “Sources have confirmed to ESPN’s Wojnarowski” that Bryant is dead.
But this is what ESPN has become. And, like a box of assorted rancid chocolates, much to choose from.
Sunday I chronicled how ESPN, starting three years ago, destroyed an innocent man’s TV career for calling Venus Williams a “gorilla” when every right-minded soul knows he did nothing of the sort — he’d complimented her successful “guerrilla” tactics.
Then ESPN, to avoid a wrongful-termination suit it would almost certainly lose, rehired tennis analyst Doug Adler, with the promise that his ESPN assignments, including the Australian Open and Wimbledon, would be restored.
Instead, ESPN placed him on its persona non grata shelf, so he could further feel the pain of ESPN’s dishonest persecution and prosecution.
Last week, ESPN distributed a news release giving the reactions of its MLB analysts and hosts to the Astros cheating scandal. Among others we heard from Eduardo Perez, Mark Teixeira and Tim Kurkjian.
Guess whose take was missing?
Correct, that of ESPN’s No. 1 game analyst, Alex Rodriguez.
That ESPN chose to hire one of the most notorious drug cheats in sports history remains sickening, so bereft of good faith that Rodriguez is excused from answering such questions and addressing such a cataclysmic baseball issue.
But that’s ESPN.
ESPN even toys with history to suit its sells. For years it found any excuse to air its “Bobby Knight Goes Berserk” reel. But after ESPN hired Knight, that disappeared from view.
It returned only after Knight left the network.
ESPN has violated minimum standards of honest broadcast journalism, so much so that it paid Barry Bonds for exclusive access and allowed his “people” to approve the scripts of reports as the drug cheat approached Hank Aaron’s career home run record.
But that’s ESPN. And its shamelessly forced, dishonest sell of itself as attached to the shocking death of Kobe Bryant is more disturbing than surprising.
NBA long-range game has become 3-alarm dire
Don’t know how much longer Adam Silver and the NBA’s “governors” can avoid the issue, but the 3-point shot, originally intended and used as a late-game comeback gimmick, has turned NBA games silly.
Basketball — the kind that emphasizes team play, quick thinking, all-in movement and exciting two-way play — has been lost to contests of “Bombs away!”
This week, the Mavericks attempted 100 field goals against the Thunder, 51 of them, more than half, 3-pointers. Kristaps Porzingis, Dallas’ 7-foot-3 shooting guard, took just seven.
What’s particularly mystifying about this Astros sign-stealing saga is how anyone thought the franchise could keep a lid on it.
The 2017 Astros played 46 men and employed eight coaches. The mere notion that all were sworn to secrecy or felt “honor-bound” to keep it secret is ludicrous.
Same with that wink-and-nod, money-first gentlemen’s agreement between Bud Selig and MLBPA boss Donald Fehr to pretend that the sudden smashing of home run records by suddenly mass-muscled, head-swollen steroid sluggers would remain ignored.
Arrogance or ignorance? Either way, the absence of foresight is mind-blowing.
In an age when ball carriers no longer “cut” but “stick a foot in the ground,” brevity and clarity have been lost to long-form goofy.
Thus, a scrolled report on MSG that Miami of Ohio has postponed two basketball games as it investigates students who may have the coronavirus concluded with: “The games will be rescheduled at a later date.”
Just “will be rescheduled” didn’t cut it? “At a later date” was needed? It’s like “going forward.” Are there options for the future? When do we arrive at going forward?
Last week, as the jet I was in approached Newark Airport, the pilot or co-pilot informed passengers that we had begun our “initial descent.” Really? How many descents did he have in mind?
I checked on my way out. Neither pilot was Mike Mayock or Kirk Herbstreit.
Truth about Zion yields some ‘heavy’ criticism
Zion Williamson’s NBA debut, shown on ESPN, left one can’t-miss impression: Williamson, listed as 6 feet 6, 284, appeared heavier, even, well, fat.
Analysts Jeff Van Gundy and Mark Jackson didn’t ignore what we/they couldn’t miss, several times remarking that Williamson, who played well in his 18 minutes, appeared corpulent.
The next day on the internet — always a source for well-comported, reasonable debate — Van Gundy and Jackson were trashed by fools for “body-shaming” Williamson, as if the conditioning of a professional athlete — the No. 1 pick at more than $20 million for two years, no less — is irrelevant.
Judging from CBS’ and the Golf Channel’s coverage from Torrey Pines last Thursday through Sunday, Tiger Woods led wire-to-wire. Even if he did finish ninth.
Steiner Collectibles, in conjunction with this year’s Hall of Fame inductions, will sell Derek Jeter toenail clippings, one to a box, certificates of authenticity included.
Atlanta Falcons patrons have defaulted on more than $32 million of PSL purchases. Another town to learn that Roger Goodell’s claim that PSLs are “good investments” was bogus.
Congrats to Gary Bettman for inviting the punk group Green Day to holler F-bombs during their performance at the NHL All-Star Game. Not that Bettman can claim ambush. The NHL agreed to a promotional deal with the band just after it released its album “Father of All Motherf—ers.” Best the NHL could do.
ESPN and its audiences would be well served if Sean McDonough were restored to the “Monday Night Football” play-by-play chair. But this time, rather than have Jon Gruden beside him, assign an analyst who’s prepared, pays attention and doesn’t leave McDonough ignored.
I’m confused. New manager Luis Rojas last season was the Mets’ director of quality control. Exactly what qualities did he control? I’ll bet he can’t wait to see Robinson Cano hit the ball, then throw it into idle.


thelibertydaily--2020-01-31--Helicopter Charter Company Suspends Flights After Crash That Killed Kobe Bryant

The charter company that owns the helicopter Kobe Bryant and his daughter Gianna were traveling in when it crashed , killing all nine people on board , suspended all of their services after the accident .
The company , Island Express Helicopter , announced they had grounded all of their flights in a statement posted to their website on Thursday .
“ All services ( regular and charter ) were immediately suspended following the tragic accident on Sunday , January 26 , ” they wrote .
“ The shock of the accident affected all staff , and management decided that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as it was deemed appropriate for staff and customers , ” they added in the statement .
After the crash , the company said in another statement that they ’ re working with the NTSB to investigate the cause of the crash , which killed their chief pilot .
“ We are deeply saddened by this tragedy .
Our top priority is providing assistance to the families of the passengers and the pilot , ” the company wrote in the statement .
“ We hope that you will respect their privacy at this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were killed in the crash on Sunday near Calabasas , Calif. when the chopper they were riding in smashed into the side of a mountain .

The charter company that owns the helicopter Kobe Bryant and his daughter Gianna were traveling in when it crashed, killing all nine people on board, suspended all its services after the accident.
The company, Island Express Helicopter, announced it had grounded all its flights in a statement posted to its website Thursday.
“All services (regular and charter) were immediately suspended following the tragic accident on Sunday, January 26,” the company wrote.
“The shock of the accident affected all staff, and management decided that service would be suspended until such time as it was deemed appropriate for staff and customers,” the statement added.
After the crash, the company said in another statement that it’s working with the NTSB to investigate the cause of the crash, which killed its chief pilot.
“We are deeply saddened by this tragedy. Our top priority is providing assistance to the families of the passengers and the pilot,” the company wrote in the statement.
“We hope that you will respect their privacy at this extremely difficult time.”
Bryant and Gianna were killed in the crash Sunday near Calabasas, Calif., when the chopper they were riding in smashed into the side of a mountain.