Dershowitz clarifies

https://www.mediaite.com/elect...t-really-part-of-it/

Alan Dershowitz clarified his role on President Donald Trump’s legal defense team in an interview with Mediate founder Dan Abrams Friday, stating he is NOT a “full fledged” member of the impeachment defense.

Dershowitz said on The Dan Abrams Show on SiriusXM’s POTUS Channel, that he will just provide an hourlong constitutional defense of the president before the Senate as Trump goes on trial next week.

“I think it overstates it to say I’m a member of the Trump team. I was asked to present the constitutional argument that I would have presented had Hillary Clinton been elected and had she been impeached,” Dershowitz said.

“I was asked to present my constitutional argument against impeachment,” he continued. “I will be there for one hour, basically, presenting my argument. But I’m not a full-fledged member of the defense team in any realistic sense of that term.”

Just be fair and honest that’s all anyone could ask.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: recoatlift,

quote:

Originally posted by flashguy:
Having Professor Alan Dershowitz on the Defense team is a real winner. He is a true Liberal, but also aa very strong proponent of the Constitution and the Law. He won't let the Dems get away with anything!

flashguy

Agreed, without question. He is absolutely a screaming liberal, and I disagree with MANY of his opinions, but he believes in the rule of law and the Constitution above all else (the difference between a leftist POS and a classical liberal.)

If he were to crash his car on Capitol Hill, sustain a concussion, drink a fifth of Jack Daniels and stagger drunk into the Senate chamber to present his Constitutional case against impeachment, he'd still have a better mastery of the topic than the entire team or House Democrat "impeachment managers."

The four Republican senators who are most likely to support calling witnesses to the senate impeachment trial are:

Collins, Gardner, Romney, and Murkowski

https://hotair.com/archives/al...alling-hunter-biden/

quote:

Originally posted by DennisM:

quote:

Originally posted by flashguy:
Having Professor Alan Dershowitz on the Defense team is a real winner. He is a true Liberal, but also aa very strong proponent of the Constitution and the Law. He won't let the Dems get away with anything!

flashguy

Agreed, without question. He is absolutely a screaming liberal, and I disagree with MANY of his opinions, but he believes in the rule of law and the Constitution above all else (the difference between a leftist POS and a classical liberal.)

If he were to crash his car on Capitol Hill, sustain a concussion, drink a fifth of Jack Daniels and stagger drunk into the Senate chamber to present his Constitutional case against impeachment, he'd still have a better mastery of the topic than the entire team or House Democrat "impeachment managers."

Dershowitz has been a guest on Mark Levin and Ben Shapiro recently. To be fair to him, he's not a "liberal" in the way the term is used today, but in the more traditional sense. He even specified on one of the programs he was more of a libertarian than anything else.

But above all, he's a believer in, and a defender of the Constitution. If anyone can make a case that DJT's impeachment is anti-Constitutional, it's Dr. Dershowitz.

Pelosi really is a vindictive and arrogant old hag isn't she

I hope she gets taken down a few notches and put in her rightful place really soon

Why Trump’s Trade Pact With China Is a Very Big Deal

written by Alexander Green January 17, 2020


The U.S.-China trade war has cast a black cloud over the U.S. economy and stock market for the last two years.

Alexander Green explains why the Phase One deal reached yesterday means blue skies ahead for equity investors.



The U.S. stock market climbed to an all-time high Wednesday. It did again Thursday. Then it hit another record today.

We don’t have to wonder why.

The announcement of this week’s trade agreement with China is not just a big deal.

It’s the most significant economic accomplishment of the Trump administration to date.

Yes, deregulation was a plus. Corporate tax reform provided a boost as well.

But – let’s face it – if a Republican president can’t get a tax cut through a Republican House and a Republican Senate, he’s in the wrong business.

With China, President Trump took a huge political risk. And it paid off. Big time.

His critics argued for two years that his “trade war” would tank the U.S. economy.

They insisted that China – immune from the democratic pressures we have at home – would simply play the long game and wait him out.

It didn’t happen. Although there was certainly some pain along the way…

Trump knew that trade tensions would negatively affect the U.S. economy. (Economists estimate that it knocked approximately 0.5% off GDP growth each of the last two years.)

The conflict adversely impacted farmers.

And it hurt U.S. importers as well as exporters, who suffered from China’s retaliatory actions.

This is exactly why Trump’s predecessors – both Republican and Democrat – preferred to appease the Chinese government rather than confront it.

Here’s what this Phase One deal accomplishes:

Beijing will ramp up purchases of U.S. goods and services by $200 billion over the next two years.
The deal prevents and punishes forced technology transfers and the theft of trade secrets.
It removes barriers that prevented U.S. banks from expanding into China’s financial markets.
The two sides agreed to create a dispute resolution office to address complaints from U.S. businesses.
China commits to not devaluating its currency to gain a competitive market advantage.
It leaves in place U.S. tariffs on about $370 billion of Chinese goods – or about three-quarters of that nation’s imports to the U.S. – to incentivize a speedy resolution of Phase Two.

The business community is already celebrating, of course. And investors are throwing a party in the stock market.

Yet the national media – predictably – has acted like the skunk at the garden party.

The Washington Post, for example, posted this “news” headline: “Trump Touts ‘Momentous’ China Deal, But Trade Tensions Are Far From Solved.”

It offered this news “analysis” headline: “‘Phase One’ Is Signed: How Much Was Really Gained?”

The editorial board moaned that, “The deal leaves intact the foundations of Chinese mercantilism: a vast system of subsidies to favored high-tech industries and state-owned firms.”

(As if Trump should have also negotiated a new political and economic system for the world’s most populous nation.)

The Post‘s op-ed page piled on with “Two Years of Trade Wars and This Is What We Get?” from Catherine Rampell and “Why Trump Caved on China” by CNN’s Fareed Zakaria.

There was no mention that the president took a huge political risk for the benefit of the country and won.

Don’t get me wrong. I remain a critic of some of Trump’s economic policies.

I favor free trade over so-called “managed trade,” where the executive branch picks economic winners and losers.

The president is flat wrong to insist that the U.S. Treasury collected billions from the Chinese as a result of his tariffs. (U.S. businesses and consumers ate the costs.)

And he could do even more good if he concentrated on the budget deficit rather than the trade deficit.

But this week’s trade deal was a meaningful victory in an economic conflict that has been building for decades.

Trump correctly calculated that his tariffs would hurt China more than us. And he was right.

(China’s third quarter GDP growth was the weakest in three decades and – despite that country’s “official” numbers – was probably flat.)

Equity investors – whatever their political stripes – should open the good champagne tonight.

China will open its markets to U.S. goods and services, boosting agriculture, manufacturing, technology and financial services.

Closer economic ties also lessen our adversarial relationship with China. (At the signing ceremony, Vice Premier Liu He played up the need for both countries to tackle challenges like terrorism, aging and environmental protection.)

Best of all, the deal reduces the economic uncertainty that investors hate.

Trade tensions with China were a black cloud over the market. Now they’re gone.

And while stocks are bound to experience the occasional squall in the weeks ahead, investors are rightly seeing blue skies ahead right now.

Good investing,

Alex

https://libertythroughwealth.c...-big-deal/?src=email

I found it hilarious last week, on one of the Jeopardy episodes, that none of the three very bright contestants, were able to identify a photo of Adam Schiff. I'd say that reflects how much attention is being paid to this impeachment fiasco by the general public.

On a side note, I can't believe that Monday will mark the launch of "The Trump Presidency: Year IV"!! And I'm looking forward to seeing it all the way to chapter VIII!!!

Yeah, we're only just half way (actually less than half way) through these threads.

It's a good thing I'm pacing myself.

quote:

Originally posted by NK402:
I found it hilarious last week, on one of the Jeopardy episodes, that none of the three very bright contestants, were able to identify a photo of Adam Schiff. I'd say that reflects how much attention is being paid to this impeachment fiasco by the general public.

In all fairness, those shows are taped 3 months in advance of airing. They still should have known who he was because he started his bullshit quest in early October and the MSN was all over it at the time.

Jim

In other good news:

Sanders, Ocasio-Cortez Angry USMCA Doesn’t Contain ‘a Single Damn Mention of Climate Change’

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) are upset that the U.S.-Mexico-Canada (USMCA) agreement, which passed in the U.S. Senate on Thursday, does not contain “a single damn mention of ‘climate change.'”

Sanders wrote on Twitter, “250 pages. 37,500 words. Not a single damn mention of ‘climate change,'” then proclaimed that “Trump’s NAFTA is a giveaway to the fossil fuel industry.”

“I voted NO because the future of our planet is more important than the short-term profits of Exxon Mobil and Chevron,” he asserted alongside a video detailing his decision.

Blah, blah , blah, wah, wah, wah.

https://www.breitbart.com/poli...tion-climate-change/

former CIA chief John Brennan:

"People are innocent until they are alleged to be in some type of criminal activity"

https://americanactionnews.com...risingly-warped-take

spoken like a good coup conspirator

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
former CIA chief John Brennan:

"People are innocent until they are alleged to be in some type of criminal activity"

https://americanactionnews.com...risingly-warped-take

spoken like a good coup conspirator

And this communist, piece of shit traitor still roams free.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
former CIA chief John Brennan:

"People are innocent until they are alleged to be in some type of criminal activity"

https://americanactionnews.com...risingly-warped-take

spoken like a good coup conspirator

Ok, wow. It's a bit scary to think that this man was the CIA Director.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
former CIA chief John Brennan:

"People are innocent until they are alleged to be in some type of criminal activity"

https://americanactionnews.com...risingly-warped-take

spoken like a good coup conspirator

He should’ve just said, ‘People are innocent if they’re left wing-swamp occupants. If not they are guilty until proven innocent.’

People like him make me sick.

quote:

John O. Brennan
✔
@JohnBrennan
On MSNBC tonight, I mistakenly said Trump wrote note, released by House yesterday, saying “get Zelensky to announce Biden investigation.” It was written by Les Parnas, who told Rachel Maddow today in explosive interview everything he did was known & directed by Giuliani & Trump.

Also remarkable that the former head of an intelligence agency seems incapable of attributing evidence correctly or even getting the names of witnesses correct. Incompetent or just sloppy and lazy?

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
former CIA chief John Brennan:

"People are innocent until they are alleged to be in some type of criminal activity"

https://americanactionnews.com...risingly-warped-take

spoken like a good coup conspirator

Holy shit that is scary coming from a man who had the CIA at his command. Just imagine if Hilary had won. Gives me chills.

Echoes of Beria.

quote:

People are innocent until they are alleged to be in some type of criminal activity"

Where tyranny begins, and why "Innocent until proven Guilty" exists.

Amazing how insightful our founding fathers were in their day and age.