I’m actually amazed when people so boldy claim something and apparently, have not taken the time to even think through what they are producing from their mouths. One such example came by way of a short, one-minute, TPUSA video in which a young woman is asked why President Donald Trump should be impeached.
The young woman is “like, omg, I’m so hip with impeachment, but I just know he’s a bad guy and shouldn’t try to be president.”
OK, she didn’t say those words, but that is the essence of what she did say.
Take a look.
Seriously, I can list several reason that President Trump could be impeached on, but the fact that people like this exist who are so easily propagandized is frightening… and she laughs at her own ignorance! https://t.co/DfEYurliYQ
— Tim Brown (@FPPTim) January 25, 2020
I admit I did laugh at how stupid this woman is when it comes to the subject. She would have been better off to say, “I don’t know” and went on about her merry way.
However, it was also a bit frightening that there are quite possibly millions of people just like her across America, due to the public indoctrinating of their minds in the public school system.
Yet, it’s not just on the side of those propagandized by the Democrats. It happens on the side of those who support the Republican Party too.
I have taken several opportunities to point out many things for which President Trump could be lawfully and constitutionally impeached. And no, I don’t “hate Trump.” The issue, as it was with the usurper Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Sobarkah, is the law.
In fact, some of the things Trump could be impeached for are things that presidents over the past few decades could have been impeached over, but ultimately there is an agenda going forth for which neither party wants to point out those crimes.
Plenty of congressmen need to be expelled as well, both Democrats and Republicans.
However, in case you missed it, Pastor Chuck Baldwin did lay out what he terms as his own Articles of Impeachment against the president.
“High crimes and misdemeanors is a basis for impeachment, the constitutional remedy for presidential behavior that subverts our democratic institutions,” Napolitano wrote. “In Mr. Trump’s case, we have undisputed evidence that he abused his power by inviting a foreign government to interfere in the 2020 presidential election and then compounded this by directing subordinates to refrain from giving congressionally commanded evidence of his behavior.”
“All three DOJ reports agreed that if the president’s behavior, though uncharged, nevertheless amounted to ‘high crimes and misdemeanors,’ he should be impeached,” Napolitano wrote.
Trump’s withholding of military aid to Ukraine until the quid pro quo of Ukraine’s announcement of a criminal investigation into former vice president Joe Biden was, according to Napolitano, a “shakedown.”
“In the language of the streets, this is a shakedown,” wrote Napolitano. “It sought to enhance Mr. Trump’s personal political needs and bears no relationship to American foreign policy.”
Napolitano further said that Trump’s refusal to cooperate with the initial investigation that led to the impeachment proceedings have left charges against him “essentially uncontested.”
“Because Mr. Trump declined to participate in the House investigation that resulted in the construction of the articles of impeachment against him—except for his tweets and bluster and the Republicans’ personal attacks on House Democratic committee chairs—the facts underlying the charges against Mr. Trump are essentially uncontested,” Napolitano wrote.
“Everyone who believes in the rule of law should be terrified of a president who thinks and behaves as if it does not apply to him,” Napolitano added. “As the DOJ has stated repeatedly, impeachment is the proper constitutional remedy for that.”
Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe succinctly stated, “If this isn’t impeachable, as many have said, then nothing is.”
You and I both know that if these charges—and the evidence prompting them—were being made against Barack Obama or any other Democrat, virtually every conservative pundit, commentator, newscaster, podcaster, preacher, etc., would absolutely and positively be supporting these articles of impeachment. And every liberal pundit, commentator, newscaster, podcaster, preacher, etc., would be opposing them. Almost no one from either side of the aisle cares a tinker’s dam about truth, justice or constitutional government: It’s ALL about partisan politics.
But in my mind, not only should Trump be impeached for the two articles in which he has been impeached, he should be impeached on many more charges.
Herein are my articles of impeachment against Donald Trump:
- Bribing prostitutes to keep silent during his presidential campaign in 2016 as a way of influencing the outcome of the election
- Dropping over 110,000 bombs and killing tens of thousands of innocent people without the approbation of Congress or a Declaration of War
- Using the bully pulpit of the presidency to call for “red flag” gun confiscation laws, which has emboldened gun grabbers across the country to enact these Orwellian gun confiscation laws
- Enacting additional gun control, e.g., a national “bump stock” ban via executive order
- Using the U.S. Justice Department to establish a national “pre-crime” law enforcement agency with the authority to arrest and confiscate the firearms of innocent American citizens on the basis that they “might” commit a crime in the future
- Passing an executive order that prohibits First Amendment freedom of speech and religion on college campuses, elevates Zionistic Judaism to de facto state religion status, makes every Christian and non-Jew in America second-class citizens and prohibits any criticism of all things Israel on college campuses—which by implication prohibits the reading of the New Testament
- Supporting Israel’s illegal and immoral apartheid “settlement” atrocities in the West Bank that are universally recognized as war crimes and a gross violation of international law
- Pardoning war criminals, which makes Donald Trump complicit in their war crimes
- Violating the emoluments clause of the U.S. Constitution (Article.1. Section.9. Clause.8.)
- Continuing and expanding America’s unconstitutional foreign wars
- Signing legislation that continues and expands the federal government’s spying on the American people
- Enacting a Declaration of Emergency to circumvent Congress and authorize federal spending not authorized by Congress
- Ceding the autonomy and independence of the United States to international government via the USMCA
- Using billions of taxpayer dollars to fund abortion providers
- Providing trillions of taxpayer dollars to foreign governments—many of them hostile to the United States (such as Israel, Turkey and Saudi Arabia)
- Sending U.S. troops to seize and possess the oil fields of an independent sovereign nation
- Exponentially increasing the national debt and deficit spending
- Signing legislation that funds gun control
I have not seen any actual refutation of any of this, but I’ve heard a lot of name calling: “Never Trumper,” “Liberal,” “Enemy combatant,” Commie” and so on by those who seem incapable of actually adhering to the Constitution.
Often, when asked for Article, Section and Clause in the Constitution to support the president’s actions, people run here and there to justify the unjustifiable when they know full well they wouldn’t do the same concerning Obama, and that is the most discouraging thing in all of this.
Those that upheld the Constitution during the Obama years simply act like, though many won’t say it, that Trump is the Second Coming of Christ. He’s not!
Yet, many Christian conservatives have idolized him to the point that they openly declare, “Trump is the only hope for America.”
Stop and think about that. The only hope for America? Really?
While I grant no man is perfect but one, the reality is that the Constitution limits and directs both Congress and the president, and frankly, both of them need a good cleaning out and prosecution for their crimes against the people.
If you wish to continue to defend the indefensible because in your mind “Well, at least he’s better than Hillary,” which isn’t really saying much, is it? then go ahead, but you are only playing the devil’s game in which the “ends justify the means.”
Become an insider!
Sign up to get breaking alerts from Sons of Liberty Media.