THE HOUSE'S HANDWRITING IS ON THE WALL AND IT'S WRITTEN IN WAR PAINT
On the very same day that the Senate Intelligence Committee announced that it will be closing its investigation into Russian collusion and with no direct evidence of it, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler announced that the he intends to move in the other direction.
Behold, "In their role, Mr. Berke and Ambassador (ret.) Eisen will consult on oversight matters related to the Department of Justice, including the Department’s review of Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation, and other oversight and policy issues within the Committee’s jurisdiction. Barry Berke is a nationally prominent expert on federal criminal law, including public corruption, recognized as one of the leading trial lawyers in the country. Norm Eisen is one of the nation’s preeminent authorities on government ethics and corruption, having co-founded Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) and served as White House Special Counsel for Ethics and Government Reform under President Obama."
With each passing day, it's abundantly clear that Nancy Pelosi and her House leadership are all-in on impeaching President Trump. It ought to be clear because Pelosi already has it scheduled.
These same miscreants also demonstrate little regard for due process or the findings thereof, like House and Senate investigations; especially those reflecting a complete dearth of evidence germane to the Russian collusion hoax or any presidential improprieties.
Before we even dig in to the latest, let's look at the timeline because it's critically important:
12 Mar 18 - House of Representatives Intelligence Committee closes investigation into Russian collusion with no direct evidence of it
12 Feb 19 - Senate Intelligence Committee announces imminent closing of investigation into Russian collusion with no direct evidence of it
12 Feb 19 - House Judiciary Committee announces an expansion into the Trump Russian collusion matter by appointing outside counsel
Consider: "We are fortunate to be adding the insight and expertise of two widely respected legal authorities to the staff of the House Judiciary Committee as we look to restore accountability, safeguard our democracy, and protect the rule of law,” said Chairman Nadler. “This is a critical time in our Nation’s history. The President of the United States faces numerous allegations of corruption and obstruction. His conduct and crude statements threaten the basic legal, ethical, and constitutional norms that maintain our democratic institutions. Congress has a constitutional duty to be a check and balance against abuses of power when necessary. Before anything else, however, we have to follow the facts and conduct the sort of oversight that has been completely absent over the last two years. The House Judiciary Committee is determined to ask critical questions, gather all the information, judiciously assess the evidence, and make sure that the facts are not hidden from the American people. I am glad to have such valuable resources available to help us ensure that this Administration is held accountable to our laws and to the American public."
Mr. Nadler, absent of even a modicum of evidence, your words are mere allegations and opinions and stand antithetical to actual investigative findings of two separate committee investigations, one by your own House and another by the Senate.
1. "The President of the United States faces numerous allegations of corruption and obstruction."
You are the source of the allegations, Mr. Nadler. Where is the evidence?
2. "His conduct and crude statements threaten the basic legal, ethical, and constitutional norms that maintain our democratic institutions."
This is platitudinous rhetoric. Where is the evidence?
3. "Congress has a constitutional duty to be a check and balance against abuses of power when necessary."
Exactly who is it that is abusing power and specifically, what about your new-found subpoena powers? By exercising them in direct in conflict to the findings of investigations from both your own House and the Senate; in the complete absence of any evidence whatsoever, does that not make you the one abusing power?
4. "Before anything else, however, we have to follow the facts and conduct the sort of oversight that has been completely absent over the last two years."
In this context, facts and evidence are synonymous. Respective investigations from the House and Senate demonstrate that there is none so, by all means, Mr. Nadler, please present that evidence because we've all been waiting to see it. It's like trying to produce a leprechaun riding unicorn, is it not?
5. "The House Judiciary Committee is determined to ask critical questions, gather all the information, judiciously assess the evidence, and make sure that the facts are not hidden from the American people."
At a point, you just have to call a spade a spade so, Mr. Nadler, there should be no more references to EVIDENCE until you can actually produce some. Your House has already failed to produce it once because it doesn't exist. The Senate failed to produce it because it doesn't exist. Your actions here speak to intent and rather than look to present existing evidence, it appears you're on a mission to simultaneously make aggravating evidence against you and your ilk disappear while you fabricate the same against a sitting president.
6. "I am glad to have such valuable resources available to help us ensure that this Administration is held accountable to our laws and to the American public."
Translated: "I'm glad we're back in charge because we need all of the help we can get in forsaking this president's agenda - the agenda of the American people - for our own permanent, utopian, totalitarian, authoritarian, tyrannical, progressive, Leftist, Marxist Socialist agenda.
Mr. Nadler. We see you. We see who you are. We see your plans and we see your intentions. Make no mistake about it - like the president said about the southern border barrier, he's building it with you or without you. In reciprocal fashion, it appears you, Mrs. Pelosi, et al. appear set to impeach the president; with evidence or without it.