The brush fires in Australia are really horrendous. Naturally, the climate change radicals are seizing the day. Finally proof that immediate action must be taken to STOP CLIMATE CHANGE. Of course nothing being proposed would have had any impact on these fires. The fires will not wait until everyone sells their car and starts riding bicycles again. When and if that happens, good luck with trying to fight these fires without using airplanes, trucks and other CO2 emitting monsters in the battle. This is beyond absurd, but that does not stop a whole lot of people from jumping on board the climate change bandwagon.

But, in their haste, they missed something big. I mean really big. It turns out that these fires aren’t the result of climate change; they are the result of arson. And not just one or two arsonists. There are reports that Australian police have arrested 183 people for lighting brush fires. Have you heard anyone in the MSM, including the people on Fox News mention this? No, instead they are trying to make a bad situation look worse. I saw one report that said ¼ of Australia was on fire. So I did some math. The latest report is that 14,000 square miles of land are on fire. That is, indeed, a very large area. But Australia is a very big place. As far as I can tell, there are 2.97 million square miles of land in Australia. So, while these fires are big, in order to cover ¼ of Australia the fire would have to be about 742,500 square miles. The reality is that these fires cover about 1/212 or .48% of Australia. This is about the equivalent of the amount of Native American blood in Elizabeth Warren.

I recently discovered that one can watch Australian News live on YouTube. So I watched some of the coverage from the people who are actually there. The situation is truly horrific, but not exactly the end of civilization as we know it. It has been hot in Australia, but this is not necessarily because of climate change. In 1938 New South Wales began a 37 day heatwave where the temperature was over 100F. There was even one week where the average was 116F with a peak of 119F. That heatwave broke a record that had been set in 1896.

So, when the Washington Post says Australia may see its hottest day ever recorded, take it with more than one grain of salt. We do get hotter temperatures in our cities now, in part because of all of the cement and asphalt. Anyone who stands on unshaded cement patio in Folsom during the summer knows that this gets really hot. But that does not mean the entire climate has changed. That is why real scientists pay very close attention to the location of thermometers. They probably learned this from my dad. He located the thermostat in our house on the same wall as the furnace chimney. That, of course, was the warmest wall in the house when the furnace was running. Then he would take my shivering mother over to look at that thermostat to prove it wasn’t actually that cold.

Much of the current problem appears to be more the result of human activity than global climate. That is particularly true when a whole lot of people are literally setting fires. In addition, we are all learning that more attention needs to be paid regarding where homes are located how we manage our forests.

This reminds me of an important personal principle. If CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, the New York Times and the Washington Post all are warning you about imminent disaster, it is safe to go to bed without worry. The only thing certain is that these guys are NEVER right. There are enough things to worry about on this planet; the illusion of global warming can be safely dropped from the list.

TDM

One of the major differences between a strong manager and a weak manager is the ability to make decisions. No one is perfect and anyone who has been responsible for making big decisions has and will make mistakes. But, the most dangerous type of manager is one who cannot bring themselves to make a decision. Failure to make a decision is a decision, and almost always the worst decision.

None of us know the full impact of the decision by Trump to take out Soleimani. Right now a lot of people are lecturing Trump about the need to get advice from congress to avoid making a mistake. However, only a fool would ask a President of the United States to trust someone like Adam Schiff. The real tragedy is that Democrats put someone like Adam Schiff as Chairman of the Intelligence Committee.

In addition, history teaches us the painful lesson from failing to make decisions on a timely basis. If the allies in Europe had taken on Adolph Hitler a couple of years earlier, he would have been easy to defeat. Even after Hitler invaded Poland, and the Allies declared war on Germany, he was still vulnerable. France, at that time, had the largest Army in the world. But, the leaders of France and England could not decide what to do, so they did nothing. The result was that Hitler built up his military during the “phony war” and when he did strike, he quickly overwhelmed that enormous French army.

We will never know what would have happened if the allies had attacked Hitler at the start of World War II. We definitely know the horrific cost paid by everyone when that decision was made for them.

Similar things are easy to see in retrospect with regard to the attack on Pearl Harbor. U.S. Intelligence knew that Japanese spies were producing reports that basically mapped the ships in the harbor. That should have been a red flag warning, but it was ignored.

On the morning of December 7^th, 1941, a U.S. radar station picked up the Japanese attack force at 7:02 a.m. The radar operators reported this to Lt. Kermit Tyler who was in charge of the Aircraft Warning Information Center. He told them to now worry about it. Shortly after 8:00 a.m., about one hour later, the Japanese air raid struck, catching the U.S. totally unprepared. We do not know how much could have been done within that one hour window, but it could hardly have been worse. What we do know is that the second wave, which began about 8:50 a.m. was far less successful than the first wave and the Japanese lost a lot more planes. The second wave was definitely met with a lot of Anti-aircraft fire and that was AFTER several major battleships had been destroyed. In addition, the smoke from the first attack made it much harder to see. We will never know how much difference it would have made if an air raid warning had been issued when those planes were first spotted. We do know the horrible price paid because that decision was not made.

At a time like this, we all need to unite behind our President and be grateful that he had the courage to make the decision. That does not mean there will be no further pain, in fact this decision will almost certainly result in significant cost. But the highest cost usually comes from people in a position to make critical decisions who are too paralyzed by fear to take decisive action.

I have personal experience with this. When the Rodney King verdict was announced in Los Angeles, the company I worked for had a major headquarters located in Watts. I immediately called that company President and strongly advised him to evacuate. Fortunately he quickly realized the threat and he took decisive action. Our people did manage to evacuate, but in some cases they were literally seconds from disaster. After I made that call, I called my own boss and told him what I had done. He became angry and said I should have asked for permission before making that call. I told him I would rather have him angry at me for what I did than for what I did not do. An hour later, after he had learned more about what happened, he called me and apologized.

We are due to pick the next person to be President of the United States in about 11 months. The most important qualification for a President is the ability to make difficult, if not impossible decisions during a time of crisis. President Trump passed that test, those seeking to replace him, not so much. The Democratic screech owls in congress are merely proving why we would be insane to trust any of them.

TDM

Chuck Todd is one of the most self-righteous and arrogant people on television. He is also ignorant and hopelessly naïve. Now he considers anyone who votes for Trump as believing in Fairy tales and he is particularly scornful of anyone who believes in Noah’s ark.

I have one simple question for Chuck Todd. “What is your explanation for the world you see around you?” If you tell me you believe in real science and evolution, you will merely be exposing your own ignorance. The story of Noah is not a scientific journal. But it is a better explanation for the world we see than the idiotic theories published in scientific journals.

There are, sadly, a lot of people who believe in things that are obviously not true. No theory explaining this world that relies only on randomness works. The following article unintentionally, points out the problem:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1941456/

“Yet, many investigators are trying to identify even the slightest trace of natural selection using various statistical methods (99–102). Using these methods, a number of authors have reported that a substantial proportion of amino acid substitutions are caused by positive Darwinian selection (103–106). However, the statistical methods used are based on many assumptions, which are not necessarily satisfied with actual data.”

In other words, it is people like Chuck Todd, with challenged intellectual capacity, incapable of seeing the world around them who believe in fairy tales. Only your fairy tales are based on an irrational belief in a series of miraculous accidents occurring randomly over billions of years that somehow miraculously fall into a discernible pattern obvious to everyone who is paying attention. The one thing scientists agree on is that none of this is even mathematically possible.

Romans 1:22. “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.”

TDM

This is real. This is not made up. Nova Scotia is sinking. It has been sinking at a rate of about 15 centimeters per century. Steven Martin Saxby repeatedly warned that astronomical conditions would create exceptionally high tides on the upper reaches of the Bay of Fundy. Later, Tim Webster confirmed that yes, Nova Scotia is sinking. This is so alarming that CBC ran a story about it. At last, proof of global warming and climate change:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/thenational/nova-scotia-town-sinking-as-sea-levels-rising-1.5400370

https://www.thechronicleherald.ca/in-depth/climate-crisis/rising-seas-atlantic-canada-is-sinking-as-water-levels-swell-247264/

These articles just leave out one, very minor detail. Steven Martin Saxby was a brilliant British meteorologist; he just died in March of 1883. He wrote his reports about Nova Scotia in 1868 through 1869.  By the way, that storm which did hit in October of 1869 was named the “Saxby Gale” which was the original “perfect storm.”

So while the risk to Nova Scotia is real, it is not exactly new, and it is hard to blame a storm that occurred in 1869 on global warming. So, if there was no global warming, how did Saxby know a storm was coming? He predicted this based on the position of the sun and the moon on those dates. Some people still consider this to be a lucky guess, but the storm was very real.

So, yes, Nova Scotia is at risk of being under water, at least temporarily. But 15 cm (5.9 inches) per century means there is time to adjust. Actually Saxby recommended those adjustments by suggesting improvements of sea walls. That, by the way, is the same recommendation made by Tim Webster in 2009.

Many people are convinced that 99.999% of scientists agree that increasing CO2 levels are causing global warming. They believe this because the MSM reports this all the time. If you don’t believe in global warming you are stupid. It is indisputable. But, there are a couple of minor problems.

From 1940 to 1980, human production of CO2 increased the most. But, global temperatures actualy went down during this period. No one disputes this, they just ignore it.

The declining temperatures were well documented. In 1974 Times Magazine published an article called “Another Ice Age.” Here is a quote from that Time article:

“When meteorologists take an average of temperatures around the globe, they find that the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three decades. The trend shows no indication of reversing. Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age.”

Newsweek published an article in 1975 called the “Cooling World.” This predicted a drastic decline in food production.

They were, fortunately, wrong. We now know that temperatures between 1980 and 1998 actually increased. This legitimate increase in temperature was the start of the global warming alarmist activity. But, real scientists know that global temperature actually stopped rising in 1998. This is well documented and contrary to scary articles in the Washington Post and the New York Times, undisputed. Even the IPCC admits this.  They just call it a brief pause, an aberration, but not long enough to be a trend. But even if the facts were ignored, something had to be done. You can’t keep warning about the consequences of global warming if the earth isn’t, well, warming.

So…they responded by changing their hypothesis from global warming to climate change. This is perfect, because climate is always guaranteed to change.

This is why so many people say “climate change” but then they always talk about global warming anyway. This would be mostly amusing if it didn’t do such tremendous harm to our environment and the world economy.

Sadly, far too many people really believe that increasing CO2 levels are causing global warming and are willing to take drastic action to fix the problem. They know this because people tell them this all the time. All of the DNC candidates are promising drastic action to fight climate change. The Governor of California blames the wild-fires on climate change. I have even seen people blame the homeless crisis on climate change. If you are not on board with cutting CO2 levels you are dangerously stupid.

Real scientists know that there is no scientific evidence to support the theory that rising CO2 levels causes an increase in global temperature. As far as I can tell, the best evidence of the relationship between CO2 levels and global temperature came from the study of a 420,000 year old ice core drilled down 3,623 meters in Antarctica during 1999. This is considered to be the best representation of temperature, CO2 and deuterium over a long period of time. (Deuterium is a stable isotopic form of water.)

The people who studied this core published an article in 2007:

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/317/5839/793.full

“…our [East Antarctica, Dome C] ice core shows no indication that greenhouse gases have played a key role in such a coupling [with radiative forcing]”

Their findings were not disputed, just ignored.

These scientists believed that temperature increase preceded CO2 increase. A lot of people, including brilliant scientists with no training like Al Gore, assumed that the graph developed by this study proved that CO2 caused global warming. But the person who wrote that graph warned that it was easily to misread, because:

“It’s impossible to see a lag of centuries on a graph that covers a million years, so I have re-graphed the date from the original sources. “

In other words, a lot of this appears to come from people who didn’t know how to actually read a graph. Actually, Al Gore may have known how to read the graph, which is why he deliberately separated the CO2 graph from the global temperature graph. If he had combined the graphs, it would have been obvious, to at least some people, that CO2 levels lagged increasing temperatures.

The final summary of that report based on the ice core said the following:

The bottom line is that rising temperatures cause carbon levels to rise. Carbon may still influence temperatures, but these ice cores are neutral on that. If both factors caused each other to rise significantly, positive feedback would become exponential. We’d see a runaway greenhouse effect. It hasn’t happened. Some other factor is more important than carbon dioxide, or carbon’s role is minor.

Some will argue that the scientific report on that ice core is wrong. That is ok. History tells us that many scientific assumptions are wrong. It is theoretically possible that rising CO2 levels will, at some point, increase global temperatures. There is just no evidence of that yet. Some may wonder why the hysteria? The answer is that scientists have been making dire predictions on what would happen if CO2 levels increased and this did cause an increase in global temperature. So far, as best I can tell, none of their predictions have come true. In fact, none of them have come close to being true.

It is true that the waters in the Artic and other areas are warmer than in the past. But, there are also well known Oscillations in our oceans. The North Pacific Oscillation was discovered by Sir Gilbert Homs Walker. He was a physicist and statistician. He was not a meteorologist, but he was hired to use statistical analysis to predict monsoons in India. He is also known for describing the Southern Oscillation and other global climate phenomenon. Since he died in 1958, he did not rely on CO2 levels for his analysis of global climate. Even though he was not a meteorologist he was President of the Royal Meteorological Society from 1926 to 1927.

So, the next time someone tells you we are all going to die because of CO2 levels, be sure to do two things. One, smile, because they obviously have done zero real research. Two, don’t sell your coat.

TDM

Chuck Schumer is a strong vocal critic of President Trump. As recently as November 18^th, 2019, Schumer demanded that Trump testify in person before the U.S. Congressional Impeachment hearings. It would be naïve to pretend he has any interest in being fair to Donald Trump. There is no theory of law that would require anyone accused of a crime to testify against themselves. That includes the President of the United States. It is called the 5^th Amendment.

In October Schumer said the following:

“I’m increasingly worried that President Trump may want to shut down the government again because of impeachment, an impeachment inquiry. He always likes to create diversions,”

So when Schumer demands that Republicans call four witnesses for the “potential” senate trial, it is not designed to help Donald Trump. It would be absurd to assume that.

It is, however, an admission that the Schumer considers the House Articles of Impeachment to be inadequate. So does Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. Pelosi pushed through the Articles of Impeachment because of the urgent need to remove Donald Trump. She then said she wouldn’t bother sending them to the Senate until the Senate agreed to conduct the trial according to her requirements. This is an admission that she does not think the Articles of Impeachment, as passed by the House, are adequate to remove a President.

Then, both Nancy and Chuck dismissed their members to go home for the Holidays. This means the earliest the House can send the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate is January 7^th.. Then the question is when or even if the Senate will start a trial. One thing is certain, the Senate is not about to let Nancy Pelosi dictate how they proceed.

It gets worse. Today, Nancy Pelosi sent a letter to Donald Trump, dated December 20, saying the following:

“In the spirit of respecting our Constitution, I invite you to deliver your State of Union address before a Joint Session of Congress on Tuesday, February 4, 2020 in the Chamber of the US House of Representatives,” Pelosi wrote after she shredded the Constitution with her sham impeachment.

So….the House Democrats voted to impeach a President, because of a national emergency, then they just sat on the Articles of Impeachment without delivering them to the Senate, and went home for the Holidays. Then, by the way, they invited the President they plan to remove from office, to speak to the House on February 4^th, in accordance with the constitution. Obviously they are admitting Trump will STILL BE PRESIDENT ON FEBRUARY 4^TH.

Seriously, is anyone buying this? This is way beyond stupid. This makes the news conferences by Baghdad Bob during the Gulf War look credible in comparison.

This is so bad that even CNN may notice. It simply does not get any worse than this. Oops. Wait a minute. There are 17 days between now and January 7^th.Every time we assume Democrats have hit rock bottom, they just keep digging.

TDM

The House has voted to impeach the President of the United States. Now, they are debating whether to forward it to the Senate for a trial. Incredibly, the same people who denied due process in the House, now want to dictate rules on how to run a trial in the Senate. There is zero chance the Senate will take any guidance from the House on this matter.

The law is very clear:

 Whensoever the Senate shall receive notice from the House of Representatives that managers are appointed on their part to conduct an impeachment against any person, and are directed to carry articles of impeachment to the Senate, the Secretary of the Senate shall immediately inform the House of Representatives that the Senate is ready to receive the managers for the purpose of exhibiting such articles of impeachment …

If the Senate never receives notice from the House of Representatives that managers are appointed, the Senate has no duty to act. In fact, there would be no action the Senate could take regarding impeachment without receipt of such notice.

This brilliant decision to pass Article of Impeachment, and then do nothing, came from the inner circle of the Democratic establishment. It probably seemed like a good idea at the time. But whoever came up with this gem made a terrible miscalculation. Democrats in the House voted to remove Donald Trump from office, because it was such a major emergency. For at least some of them, doing nothing is a worst-case scenario. What, after all, was the point? If the House had such a strong case, supported by indisputable facts, then it should be easy to prove this in a trial, right? If they needed to call important witnesses, why weren’t they called by the House, when it was in total control of the process? This silly stunt by Nancy Pelosi makes the entire Impeachment process in the House look like a silly partisan stunt. You cannot declare war on the President of the United States, demand his removal from office, and then do nothing. No one, on either side of this issue, can accept that as an answer.

It will soon become more than obvious that Nancy has zero leverage here. The pressure is on her and only her. There is no pressure on the Senate to do anything. There is no pressure on Donald Trump or the White House to do anything. The world waits for Nancy and only Nancy. She is the one in the pressure cooker and the temperature will be getting hotter by the second.

BOOM!:  Response by Mitch McConnell

“It’s beyond me how the speaker and Democratic leader in the Senate think withholding the articles of impeachment and not sending them over gives them leverage,” McConnell told reporters Thursday. “Frankly, I’m not anxious to have the trial.”

TDM

It is obvious that many Democrats voting to impeach Donald Trump know they have no case. They know there is no chance he will be removed from office. That isn’t even close. They are voting to smear him with the label as being one of only three Presidents to be impeached. They believe this will discredit his presidency for eternity. They are very wrong. Instead this will be a permanent stain on the 2019-2020 House of Representatives. They will be treated similarly to the Chicago White Sox who threw away a World Series. That team is now known as the Black Sox and none of the players ever participating were able to recover. The stain of history will be on them, not Donald Trump.

John Solomon is reporting that he has bank records proving that Latvia noticed suspicious financial transactions during 2016 involving Hunter Biden. They wrote a letter to Ukraine asking them to investigate. Solomon apparently has documents, witness statements and bank records supporting this. If Democrats had only waited a few days, this would have all come out. It changes everything. How on earth can one justify impeaching a President for investigating a real crime? That is beyond absurd. The only reason this is not already public is that Democrats knew that if they subpoenaed Giuliani, that would have been appealed and it might not be resolved before June. Democrats were desperate to get this done before Christmas. They clearly were afraid of a real trial, which is why Republicans were not allowed to call ANY witnesses. Now, like lemmings, they are herding together to go off the cliff into infamy. There isn’t a parachute in sight.

One of the legal consultants for the House recommended voting to impeach, and then voting to delay sending the request for a trial to the Senate. In effect the House would be voting to impeach, but then declaring Trump assumed guilty with no need for an actual trial. That would be doubling down on stupidity. It would be trying to have your cake and eat it too, only in this case, without any actual cake.

Either way, there is unlikely to be a lengthy trial in the Senate. Democrats will give their opening statement. That will be followed with a motion by the President’s team to dismiss for lack of evidence. Once Democrats vote to approve Articles of Impeachment, they are limited to the evidence they have at the time of the vote. They don’t have any evidence. They is why Chuck Schumer tried to intimidate Mitch McConnell into calling  witnesses. McConnell did not take the bait. Odds are very high that this vote to dismiss will pass. Even Mitt Romney will have trouble voting to hold a trial based on no evidence. In addition, no Senator wants to spend several weeks being distracted by a trial where there is zero doubt regarding the outcome. Even Senators who are never-Trumpers and hate him are unlikely to want a Senate impeachment trial.

That is assuming no additional facts become public between now and the January session of the Senate. But there will be additional facts. The only reason these may not come out is if Republicans ask for the delay. They have already won, and they don’t want to risk anything that would rock the boat. They may ask Rudy to hold his fire until after the Senate “trial.”

At some point, Rudy will produce his evidence and it is even possible that Joe Biden will be indicted. Lindsey Graham may call Rudy to testify, right after the Impeachment Articles are defeated in the Senate. Unless Rudy and John Solomon are delusional, they have documented evidence of Biden extorting the Ukraine and his son receiving $millions in compensation. It is exactly that kind of fact pattern that usually results in a conviction for bribery. Watch for Joe Biden to develop an unexpected illness, like that demonstrated by Harvey Weinstein requiring him to use a walker, when anyone is looking. The usual suspects will spin, scream and holler, as they do now, but if Giuliani and Solomon have documents, witness statements, and bank records, as they claim, the evidence will be overwhelming.

In summary, if there are no new developments, these ridiculous Articles of Impeachment are doomed to a quick defeat in the Senate. The only question is how long this will take. But if there are new developments, they are almost certain to be more damaging to Democrats than Republicans. We haven’t seen this level of mass insanity since James Jones convinced his followers to drink lethal Kool-Aid. Actually, those people in Guyana didn’t drink poisoned Kool-Aid. What they did was much worse. They drank barely flavored cyanide. They knew they were taking poison that would kill them and their children. 918 people died. One third of them were children. History was not kind to them.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/books/2017/04/10/the-road-to-jonestown-jim-jones-and-peoples-temple-jeff-guinn-book-review/100143272/

History won’t be kind to the 2019-2020 House of Representatives either.

TDM

This is beyond insane. Democrats voted to add wire fraud to the impeachment articles, although this was never brought up in the actual hearings. Chuck Schumer is demanding the Senate call witnesses the House never called when it had the chance. It is bad enough to impeach a President for something that is not a crime, based on zero evidence. This is ridiculous.

It is always impossible to predict rational decisions by those who have never demonstrated the capacity for rational thought. It would be beyond stupid for Democrats to actually vote to impeach Donald Trump under these circumstances, but one suspects that won’t matter. They seem to be determined to vote to impeach, regardless of facts.

One has to wonder what evidence will even be admissible in a Senate Trial. Republicans aren’t going to care what Chuck Schumer thinks. The trials will likely start by asking the House to present its evidence with Chief Justice John Roberts presiding.

According to the constitution, only the House Judiciary Committee can bring forth articles of impeachment. The only witnesses called by the House Judiciary Committee were law professors opining on the constitution. The only other House Judiciary Committee hearing was a weird Town hall kind of event where the members of the committee asked questions of their own legal counsel. If Roberts rules that the only evidence that can be presented is that developed by the House Judiciary Committee, Democrats could be left standing there with less than nothing.

At some point, Democrats will have to produce some evidence. I doubt that Roberts will tolerate the type of fiasco put on by the House. The Supreme Court does not want to handle disputes like this between Congress and any President. The safest thing for Roberts to do is adhere strictly to the constitution and the law. If he does that, it will be close to impossible for Democrats to present any case at all.

President Trump, on the other hand is the defendant and his legal counsel does get to call witnesses and introduce new evidence. Imagine Rudy Giuliani presenting documented evidence that Joe Biden actually is corrupt. Imagine Adam Schiff having to either plead the 5^th, commit perjury, or admit that most of his public statements were lies. The list goes on and on.

Unless we are missing something really big, Democrats appear to be headed toward an unprecedented political disaster. If they don’t vote to impeach now, they will lose a significant portion of their base. But if they do impeach and are embarrassed in the Senate that could arguably be even worse. This looks like the ultimate lose-lose scenario.

November 3, 2020 is a long way off, but I sure wouldn’t bet on Democrats having much to celebrate unless someone or something big intervenes between now and then. For most of my life I have watched Democrats outmaneuver Republicans time and time again. This time, it looks like Democrats have out maneuvered themselves and Republicans look to be uniquely focused and united. Unless something changes, Democrats are about to reap the whirlwind.

TDM

Most of you know what I mean when I describe the House Judiciary meetings as a “cluster.” If you don’t know, just assume it is means messed up beyond recovery. The House Judiciary Committee put on their best argument today, in a public hearing, and participating Democrats were embarrassed. That is those capable of embarrassment were embarrassed. When Nadler was awake, which was not always the case, he appeared rattled. Democrats launched self-righteous sermons. When they did try to discuss facts, they were quickly debunked by the next Republican. I am sure there are many on the liberal left still trying to convince themselves that this was great. But most people have sobered up by now and this was really ugly. While the Democrats were floundering, Republicans came armed for bear. If the American people are buying the Democratic spin, we are hopelessly doomed. But that will only happen if no one actually listened or they are all disciples of AOC. Most of the people I know, both Republican and Democrat, liberal or conservative will have no problem understanding this.

Undoubtedly some hate Donald Trump enough to vote for impeachment regardless of facts, but most people will be troubled by an attempt to remove a President of the United States from office without having something resembling a case. Not only do they have zero evidence of a crime, they can’t even make the case that Trump was wrong to suggest investigating Joe and Hunter Biden. Democrats don’t have a thin case; they don’t have a case at all.

In addition, Republicans got the opportunity to trash Hunter Biden with a lot of inconvenient facts that totally destroy the narrative. Since a lot of people on the left get all their information from CNN, MSNBC or AOC, they probably bought the argument that there was no evidence either Joe or Hunter Biden did anything wrong. They probably also considered the allegation that Ukraine interfered in the 2016 election to be just a debunked conspiracy theory. The reality is that there is solid evidence regarding the Bidens and Ukraine literally admitted interfering in the 2016 election. Today, for the first time, Republicans got a chance to make the case on national television. This had to be shocking for at least some people.

Who knows what will happen. We know what should happen, but that would require some element of common sense and consideration of doing the right thing. So far, there is zero evidence Democrats in the House are capable of either. But, there’s the rub. If there are just 18 Democrats in the House who see this for what it is, and vote against this, it will be a humiliating defeat for the DNC..

There are 31 Democrats who won election in districts where Trump won big time. If they vote to impeach this President, for this reason, they should be making plans for alternative work after being voted out of office. The only thing that would save them is the Republican tradition of picking candidates who could lose an election to a fence post.

We are about to learn how many Democrats are actually willing to go on a final suicide mission appropriately named: “Cluster’s Last Stand.” Those foolish enough to participate in this fiasco should do a little research and see that worked out for those who participated in Custer’s Last Stand.

In both cases the defeat would be caused by “Sitting Bull.”

TDM

While watching the local news last night, I was shocked by what appears to be an abrupt change in coverage regarding Donald Trump. This part of the program is always based on feeds from the MSM. So, one must assume, that this was similar throughout the country. Previously every station was reporting primarily the Democratic Spin and a short segment on the Republican response. Anyone watching this would have assumed that the legal noose was closing in on Donald Trump. That all changed last night.

Suddenly, the reporting was fair and balanced and if anything, it was Democrats who got the short shift. There was this ridiculous video of all those Democrats solemnly marching in like Monks on a Mission to deliver their proposed articles of impeachment. They consisted of two charges, abuse of power and obstruction of justice. Abuse of power was based solely on asking Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden. Obstruction of Justice was blamed on Trump claiming executive privilege. Recent news reports and the pathetic response by Joe Biden have obviously had an impact. The result was that this impeachment announcement looked pathetic. There were no comments even hinting at support for the validity of this impeachment. What was presented was the Republican rebuttal, the interview with William Barr and comments by President Trump.

If the reporting is similar across the country, this is an unmitigated disaster for Democrats in the House. As Lyndon Johnson said when Walter Cronkite turned against the war: “If I’ve lost Cronkite, I’ve lost Middle America.” LBJ was wrong, most of the country still supported the war, but LBJ did lose support among Democratic members of congress. Cronkite’s report was based on a single visit to Vietnam and he did not have a clue regarding what was going on. Cronkite’s reporting on the Tet Offensive was not only wrong, it was absurd. The Tet Offensive was a military disaster for the NVA and the Viet Cong, but Cronkite viewed this as evidence we were caught in a quagmire. Facts, however, did not matter. What did matter is how LBJ responded to this and that was devastating for the Democratic Party and ultimately the country.

If the reporting I saw last night continues, then Democrats in the House have lost the MSM and ultimately the country. When you combine this with the IG report this is a stunning change of the political environment. This is as bad as it gets. Any Democratic member of congress, who plans on running for re-election, should be very afraid. This sure appears to have made a 180-degree turn.

Perhaps the real question today is who is in control of the Democratic Party? If it is the traditional establishment, they will be desperately seeking an exit. But they may not be able to do that. It is increasingly clear that the Democratic primaries are totally dominated by the extreme liberal left. Incredibly, it is distinctly possible that contrary to what is increasingly obvious, Democrats just make continue to follow the radical left off the cliff of self-destruction.

TDM