More and more Democrats have signed on to the idea that they should seek to impeach President Donald Trump, with 130 House Democrats currently wishing to impeach and with the fourth-ranking Democrat having recently announced his desire to go down that route. However, Monmouth University recently ran a poll that shows dire news for Democrats who wish to impeach: it would only help Trump in the long run.
 
Recently, Monmouth University ran a survey asking people a number of things. Questions like Trump's job approval among surveyors, Congress’ job approval and other things were asked (and I’ll get to that first one), but most important are questions 4, 6, 8, and 9-13.
 
Here is what question 4 said: “Do you think President Trump should be impeached and compelled to leave the Presidency, or not?” And here are the results: 35% said that Trump should be impeached or compelled to leave office, while 59% said he should not and 6% said they didn’t know. That is a massive, 24-point difference in the sentiment surrounding impeachment.
 
Despite the Left’s best efforts to accuse Trump of being a Russian agent or being unfit to serve or having broken the law at any capacity, FAR MORE PEOPLE say that he shouldn’t be impeached than he should. This goes to show the failure of the media to try and shape reality. They have insisted for over 3 years that Donald Trump was unfit or was in some way a criminal and none of it has stuck.
 
Question 6 says the following: “Do you think it is a good idea or a bad idea for the House Judiciary Committee to conduct an impeachment inquiry into President Trump that may or may not lead to impeachment?” This was the result: 41% said it was a good idea for the House Judiciary Committee, which is led by Jerry “Doughboy” Nadler, to conduct inquiry into impeaching Trump. 51%, in turn, said it was a bad idea to do so. A 10-point difference.
 
Now, I didn’t mention question 7 in the “important questions” list, but it is relevant to question 6, so I will briefly cover it. Question 7 is split into two questions: 7A and 7B. 7A asks the people who answer “good idea” to question 6 why it is that they feel the way they do. 17% of those say that it’s because they believe he broke the law, 18% say because the aforementioned Committee needs to follow evidence, 17% say because of bad moral character/personality, 16% say because he has enacted bad policies or is doing a bad job, 10% say because he acts above the law and must be held accountable, 11% say because he is racist or because he is bad for immigration. There are other reasons, but one I would like to point out is that only 3% say because he has “Russia ties”.
 
While many of these reasons are fake news narratives, such as breaking the law, acting above the law, insisting there is evidence of criminal activity, etc., the 3% Russia ties is quite significant in showing how bad of a job the Left did in trying to frame Trump as a Russian asset or having colluded with Russia.
 
For the most part, I imagine that those who say he broke the law will argue that the law he broke was relating to wanting to fire Mueller or complaining about the investigation being a witch hunt, etc., none of which are an actual crime (though Mueller certainly tried to make it look like they were instances of obstruction of justice), otherwise far more people would be signed on to the idea of impeachment, and none of it really has to do with actual Russian collusion. Three years of insisting Trump colluded with Russia has culminated in people really not buying it. Though, that tends to happen when no actual evidence of the deed has been shown.
 
But in any case, while these may be the (really poor) reasons people have stated to impeach Trump, question 7B asks those who think it’s a bad idea for Nadler to begin impeachment inquiry why they think the way they do. 27% say that Trump did nothing wrong, 22% say it would be a waste of time/money, 12% say Trump’s done a good job, 13% say because it would be a witch hunt and entirely partisan, 10% say Congress should work on other things, and 5% say because it would backfire on Democrats.
 
So while there are those who are insane enough to believe the b.s. of the Left (at least some of it), there are far more people who think it would be unwarranted to call for impeachment of the POTUS.
 
But let’s move on to question 8. It’s rather lengthy and basically explains the impeachment process (House votes to pass articles of impeachment and two-thirds of Senate, or 66 votes, in order to remove the President from office) but it basically asks how likely it would be for the Senate to remove Trump if House votes to impeach. 6% said it would be very likely, 14% said somewhat likely, 25% said not too likely and 50% said not at all likely. That’s 20% to 75% in favor of “not likely” that the Senate would vote to impeach.
 
This largely hinges on the actual rules of the Senate and Trump’s favorability as it stands. 66 Senators would have to vote in favor of impeachment. There are 45 Democrats and 2 Independent Senators, those being Bernie Sanders and Angus King, neither of which like Trump, so they’d likely vote to remove from office. One could assume all 45 Dems would vote to remove Trump from office, so that’s 47 votes. This would require 19 Republicans to vote to remove Trump from office. And while people like Romney, Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski and Ben Sasse might vote to remove Trump from office, that’s still not enough votes to do so and with Trump’s good numbers, it’s unlikely they would vote to remove (well, maybe Romney still would because he’s an idiot, but I don’t know about the rest. When Ben Sasse isn’t talking about Trump, I tend to like him because he tends to be conservative, but I don’t really know what he would do).
 
Sure, there are probably others in the Senate who hate Trump as much as the Democrats do, but wouldn’t dare be vocal about it, particularly now. And considering Lindsey Graham seems to be on Trump’s side now, that’s one less likely vote to remove Trump.
 
But that’s if it even reaches the Senate. With the way things are, I don’t think the House would vote to impeach. Again, only 130 Democrats are signing on to it (and probably a couple Republicans and Independents), but Nancy Pelosi doesn’t even want this on the House floor. So impeachment is not likely at all to occur.
 
Now, for the sake of time, I will briefly cover the remaining important questions.
 
Question 9 asked if people thought it’d be a good idea for the House to conduct impeachment proceedings even if the Senate was unlikely to remove Trump from office. Only 37% said it would be a good idea and 56% said it would be a bad idea.
 
Question 10 asks if Trump would be in a stronger or weaker position to win reelection if impeached but not removed from office. 31% said he’d be in a stronger position and only 23% said he’d be in a weaker position. Though 36% said there wouldn’t be a significant impact.
 
Question 11 is similar to question 10, but asks the same of Democrats keeping the House in 2020. 27% said they’d be in a stronger position to retain the House, 34% said they’d be in a weaker position and 31% said there wouldn’t be a significant impact.
 
Question 12 asks people if their elected representative voted to impeach, would that make voters more or less likely to vote for that representative again? 24% said more likely, 26% less likely and 46% no significant impact.
 
Question 13 is similar but asks if the representative voted against impeachment, would people vote for them again? 16% said more likely, 28% said less likely, 51% no impact.
 
Those last two questions particularly put Democrats in purple states in danger because it’s a no-win situation. If they vote to impeach, more people would be less likely to vote. If they vote against impeachment, the same thing happens. It’s damned if you do, damned if you don’t for them, which is another reason Pelosi doesn’t want this on the House floor. Not only is it unlikely to do anything to hurt Trump, it would likely HELP him in 2020 and it would likely HURT the Democrats in 2020, particularly in the House.
 
Now, another thing that I feel obligated to mention (as I said I would get to) is Trump’s approval rating in the Monmouth University poll. It’s not exactly great numbers for Trump, sitting at only 40% approval rating, but that’s actually par for the course for Trump in this survey. His highest numbers, at least since March of 2017, have been 44 or 43%. 40% is far from the lowest he’s gotten and rather normal for this survey (of which only 25% of registered Republicans participated, 30% Democrats and 45% Independents, so that explains some numbers).
 
I personally think his approval is considerably higher than that, but even taking this number at face value, it’s far higher than the Democrats would want in order to be confident about impeachment proceedings.
 
Pelosi noticed that Clinton’s approval numbers were not bad at all when the GOP sought to impeach and she noticed that move seriously hurt the Republicans moving forward, at least to some extent. She doesn’t want the same thing to happen to the Democrats, not because she cares about the Party, but because that would put her position of power in peril. Pushing to impeach would likely make Trump stronger in 2020 and would likely make any incumbent who voted in favor likely to lose (in districts not in solid blue states, at least).
 
That’s not to say Pelosi doesn’t want to impeach Trump. She does, but she doesn’t want to sacrifice her power in order to *maybe* achieve that (and, of course, it’s not likely at all that the Senate will vote to remove Trump).
 
With more and more Democrats signing on to the idea of impeaching Trump, they may be appeasing the Leftist Hollywood elitists who demand this and maybe even be appeasing some in their base, but as I’ve said before, that base is shrinking. Most people don’t want impeachment and if Democrats go against that, it will only hurt them going forward. Every Democrat who says they should impeach Trump gives ammo to Trump and only to Trump.
 
And that’s why I want them to go for it. I want them to try and impeach because of how catastrophic a failure it would be for them. But we’ll see what happens. We’ll see if Pelosi still has enough political muscle to rein in these lunatic Leftists.
 
Luke 10:19
“Behold, I have given you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall hurt you.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

On January 3rd, 2019, Democrat Representative Brad Sherman (D-CA) moved to introduce articles of impeachment against President Donald J. Trump, accusing Trump of having obstructed justice in the firing of James Comey.
 
Sherman told the LA Times: “There is no reason it shouldn’t be before the Congress. Every day, Donald Trump shows that leaving the White House would be good for the country.”
 
An awful lot about this entire thing is very hilarious in my opinion.
 
First, to rebuke Sherman, is it really good for the country to raise taxes once again on middle-class families and on businesses? Is it good for the country to open our borders and allow for criminal illegal aliens (and they are all criminals based on the fact they are ILLEGAL) to come in and at best be simply leeches for our economy and at worst be rapists and murderers of our people? Is it really good to have our economy return to stagnation and horrible unemployment rates?
 
There’s more that I could talk about, but this is not the main point of the article. I’m just trying to highlight the cost of removing Trump (and Pence) from office.
 
Second, if the firing of James Comey could legitimately be seen as an impeachable offense, Trump would’ve been removed ages ago. RINOs and even Nancy Pelosi have held reservations of impeaching Trump based on this because it seems mostly like politics (which is the point of impeachment, as it’s not a tool for justice, but they have to at least pretend there is some justice being served).
 
Sure, the Democrats control the House now, but this is not likely to fly. Why do I say this? Because Sherman introduced these very same articles of impeachment in 2017 and only got one other Democrat, Rep. Al Green (D-TX), to go along with it before Green introduced his own articles of impeachment regarding the supposed Muslim ban.
 
And it’s not even like the reason those articles were denied was because Democrats didn’t hold the House at the time. That’s largely irrelevant. If they thought either the Muslim ban or the firing of James Comey seemed legitimate enough, they would’ve pushed for it extremely hard, even if they knew it would not pass at the time.
 
In other words, Democrats are not confident on impeaching Trump based on this.
 
But let’s say that they do all push for it. The Democrats hold the majority, so if they all vote in favor of it, articles of impeachment would head to the Senate. But guess who not only has control of that, but has even expanded its hold on it since the election?
 
Even with Mitt Romney in the Senate, I don’t think he’s so much of an idiot as to vote in favor of impeaching Trump based on this. And even if he is, the Democrats would need 14 other Republicans to vote alongside them for a two-thirds majority. If even Democrats aren’t all that confident over these reasons, there’s little doubt enough Republicans would go for it for these reasons as well.
 
The thing about impeaching Trump over firing James Comey is that Trump, as head of the executive branch, can fire and hire whomever he wants in the executive branch. The FBI, though it often works with the Legislative branch, is part of the executive branch and the POTUS chooses whether or not he/she fires the Director for any given reason.
 
As I’ve said in the past, Donald Trump won’t be impeached. Unless the Mueller investigation can actually come up with damning and solid evidence of collusion with Russia (a narrative that has been dying for quite a while now), Trump is not going to be impeached. The Democrats’ best hopes of getting Trump out of office will be by beating him in 2020 with a cast of a pervy lunatic (Biden), a fake Indian (Warren), a drunk driver (Beto O’Rourke), an ill-educated Marxist (Sanders), or the wife of the worst President this country’s ever seen (Michelle Obama). And these are simply the most prominent ones that supposedly even stand some sort of chance.
 
Of course, there’s Kamala Harris and Cory “Not very Smarticus” Booker to be talked about, but they can hardly be considered any more reasonable and of sound-mind than Warren or Biden.
 
But returning to the eager beaver Democrats in the House, all I can do is laugh at their pathetic display of a fighting spirit. Even beyond impeachment, there is honestly not much that Democrats can do even with a majority in the House.
 
Raise taxes? Senate will almost certainly block that. Medicare-for-all? Ditto. Just about anything overly and obviously socialistic? Nope, not happening.
 
The only things that will pass the Legislature are bipartisan things like the First Step Act. Democrats can’t strong-arm anything. Unfortunately, neither can Republicans, but they never intended to do so given they largely didn’t pass much of worth while they controlled both chambers of Congress apart from tax cuts.
 
But aside from that, there is virtually nothing that the Dems can do. Some of the biggest damage they can honestly cause is starting investigation after investigation on Trump, his campaign, and everything they possibly can, and even that is not bound to be fruitful for them.
 
Apart from that, the damage they can cause is the economy to slow down a little, which is not helped by the fact that a useless organization like the Fed plans to continue raising interest rates.
 
And now that Democrats hold the House, I hope and pray that people can see just how bad it is when Democrats are in control of anything and this leads to an absolute Red Wave come 2020, with Trump being soundly reelected, conservatives gaining in the Senate and retaking the House by a great majority.
 
As it stands, it’s still too early to make any sort of predictions, but that’s my sincerest hope. We cannot allow for the socialist Left to retake this country, because that would mark the last time we would likely be able to elect someone like Trump.
 
1 Peter 5:8
“Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour."
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

There were two big news stories told this week. One was the discovery of Mollie Tibbetts’ remains and subsequent arrest of an illegal alien suspected in her disappearance and murder, prompting many to bring up the urgent need of building a wall at the southern border with Mexico and the need to end DACA once and for all.
 
The other story, which I will be covering here (I wanted to mention the Tibbetts’ story because this happened at the same time as the trials and the MSM is either going to ignore this entirely or dismiss it as unimportant like the insensitive, heartless monsters they are) is the story of Paul Manafort and Michael Cohen being found guilty on several different charges.
 
Cohen was found guilty of violating campaign finance laws by paying off Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal, seemingly at the request of Donald Trump, while Manafort was found guilty of 8 charges of lying to the FBI and hiding his income, among other things.
 
These two cases have given the MSM a lot to talk about and hyped up the idea of finally moving to impeach President Trump. But there’s one problem with that. Actually, there’s multiple problems.
 
First, let’s focus on Manafort. If the Left thinks they can impeach Trump over anything Manafort related, they will be disappointed. What Manafort did happened well before Trump even decided to run for office. Nothing within the Manafort case implies Trump had anything to do with it. The point of the Manafort case was to get Manafort to flip on Trump, by applying pressure on him. Clearly, that didn’t work. Most likely because Manafort doesn’t have anything on Trump to flip on.
 
However, that does bring us to Cohen and the problem with thinking he could do much more than Manafort.
 
Cohen did flip on Trump. If you go by the train of thought that Manafort didn’t flip because he had nothing to flip on, then one can easily say that Cohen did flip because he DOES have something on Trump.
 
Here’s the problem with that train of thought, which really translates to the bigger problem for the Left in believing this will mark the end of Trump: even Mueller didn’t think there would be anything substantial here.
 
Granted, he could have misjudged, but the reason he sent the Cohen case to the SDNY is because there likely was nothing there for Mueller to use and wanted a lower court to look into it.
 
Now, this does bring us to Cohen’s and his lawyer Lanny Davis’ claims. Davis, particularly, told the New York Post: “Mr. Cohen has knowledge on certain subjects that should be of interest to the special counsel and is more than happy to tell the special counsel all that he knows.”
 
“Not just about the obvious possibility of a conspiracy to collude and corrupt the American democracy system in the 2016 election, which the Trump Tower meeting was all about, but also knowledge about the computer crime of hacking and whether or not Mr. Trump knew ahead of time about the crime and even cheered it on.”
 
This is music to my ears. Why? Because if this were poker, Davis just showed his tell for a massive bluff.
 
Here’s the thing: if Cohen did really have information that interests the special counsel, he already would have given it. Cohen knew that his affiliation with Trump and the supposed campaign finance laws he was breaking were going to get him a guilty verdict. He could save himself some jail time by giving Mueller what he wanted.
 
My guess is he doesn’t have anything on Trump. He clearly is a snake, given he has clearly flipped. If he had anything on Trump, he would have already given it to Mueller and saved his own skin. He has now been convicted of a crime, something he easily could have avoided (or made the punishment far less severe) if any of the tapes or any information he had could actually hurt Donald Trump.
 
Now, there are other claims, such as Cohen saying that he was acting under the orders of Trump to pay off the women. Trump claims he did not know about the payments. It’s a “he said, she said” and Cohen has a record for being a shady and untrustworthy character. Given he has nothing on Trump, it’s likely he has nothing to prove that Trump ordered the payments of Daniels and McDougal. If he did, given just about everyone with a double-digit IQ could tell he would be found guilty, he would have given the information to Mueller ages ago.
 
Again, it comes back to what he had on Trump. He can claim Trump is Osama bin Laden for all it matters. If he doesn’t have the evidence to prove it, Mueller and the Left have nothing to destroy Trump with.
 
Lanny Davis screwed up majorly here. He inadvertently revealed his hand is crap.
 
Sun Tzu once famously said: “Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak.”
 
Davis here is showing a lot of strength and bravado, promising that Cohen has info for the special counsel relating to collusion and even hacking of the elections, which is a narrative the Left dropped a long time ago.
 
It’s simply too good for the Left to be true. And in all likelihood, it isn’t.
 
So where does this realistically leave us? Well, with Manafort, Trump might pardon him. It will tick off the Left but not bring up any realistic theories of obstruction, given the Manafort case had nothing to do with the election. With Cohen, given what he has sought in his guilty plea and the claims his lawyer has been making, he will have to prove his claims. And when he can’t, there will be Hell to pay. So chances are good that everything he says from this moment onward will be a lie, because that is the only way they can even hope to hurt Trump (at least in poll numbers) and even that is not likely to work given that's what the Left has been trying to do for ages and failing miserably.
 
So, at the end of the day, the Cohen and Manafort trials (more specifically Cohen) leave us with a Democrat Party more actively seeking impeachment, bringing it to the forefront of the midterms, and an energized Trump base ready to bring in a red wave. Granted, this can also energize the Democrat base, so it will likely be a battle, but historically, Democrats have been winning when Republicans haven’t been voting. That doesn’t bode well for a Democrat Party that is doing everything they can to win the House and Senate. If Republicans turn out to vote, there is little hope for any blue wave and impeachment.
 
I know for a fact that I will go out to vote for the Republicans that I can in my state and will help Trump remain in the White House. Because as it stands, no matter what the special counsel wants to subpoena from Trump, he can’t prove any collusion and can’t get him impeached without Republicans voting for impeachment.
 
Why? Because no one who is sane (or at least unbiased) would consider paying off women as part of “campaign contributions.” In fact, Bradley Smith, former FEC chairman, has said in a WSJ editorial: "Not everything that might benefit a candidate is a campaign expense." In the editorial, he cites examples such as: paying a personal debt or buying a Rolex watch or a new suit... and even paying hush money... these payments are not campaign contributions, according to Mr. Smith.
 
Meanwhile, with these cases wrapped up, I’m sure the DOJ can now focus on the Uranium One deal and the illegality of the Steele dossier. I’m sure. (Sarcasm, in case that wasn’t clear).
 
Ephesians 6:11
“Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil.”
 
Author: Freddie Marinelli.

As we enter the 2018 mid-term cycle, more and more talks about Democrats winning to impeach Trump will occur. They will certainly run on that. They’ve talked about impeaching him well before he even took office and will continue talking about it until he’s finished with his 2nd term as President.
 
But it seems as though at least one writer from one Mainstream Media source realizes the error in the Democrat Party’s ways. Jeet Heer (yes, that’s a real name), a Leftist writer for the website “New Republic”, wrote an article calling for Democrats to stop focusing on impeaching Trump and start focusing on just beating him at every chance they get.
 
The article is titled: “The Democrats’ Dangerous Obsession With Impeachment.”
 
Quite the powerful, Leftist-bashing title, especially coming from another Leftist.
 
The article begins with: “Amid a stream of revelations, arrests, and plea bargains from Robert Mueller’s investigation of Donald Trump campaign’s connections with Russia, liberals are becoming giddy at the prospect of impeaching the president.”
 
“Becoming”? They’ve been giddy at the prospect of impeaching him since before he took office! The Russia investigation is almost all they’ve talked about this past year. WHAT DO YOU THINK ITS INTENT IS?! It’s meant to lead to Trump’s impeachment. They want him locked up too, but they’d settle with impeachment, as long as they can also impeach Mike Pence.
 
But they aren’t just “beginning” to get giddy at the thought of succeeding. They’ve been dreaming about this almost since the election. I say almost because they’ve had to have time to grieve over the fact that their liar of a candidate, Crooked Hillary, was absolutely destroyed in the election.
 
The article then talks about how Vox’s founder, Ezra Klein, “argued last week that impeachment be normalized as a regular procedure in American democracy… [Ezra] wanted to redefine the rules for impeachment so they apply to Trump, a president who has demonstrated that he is manifestly unfit for office. ‘Impeachment is not a power we should take lightly,’ Klein wrote. ‘Nor is it one we should treat as too explosive to use. There will be presidents who are neither criminals nor mental incompetents but who are wrong for the role, who pose a danger to the country and the world… Being extremely bad at the job of president of the United States should be enough to get you fired.’”
 
After writing that he subjectively believes “it is true that Trump is ‘extremely bad at the job of president”, he recognizes that such a definition would be a bad idea because impeachment would then be used as a political weapon (or at least a more readily used one than it already is) and that the reasons for impeachment are entirely subjective (which defines every reason the Left currently has for impeaching him).
 
But let’s go with it for now. If being bad at being president should get you fired, why wasn’t Obama fired within his first 4 years? The Fast and Furious scandal, which even the National Review acknowledges as one of the Obama administration’s “earliest embarrassments”, put around 2000 weapons into the hands of criminals south of the border. One of which took the life of U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry.
 
If allowing criminals outside the border to get weapons isn’t considered “being a bad president”, then what is? He willingly put border patrol agents’ lives in danger. And he’s not an idiot. He knew the consequences of such actions. He just didn’t care.
 
Like he didn’t care about the 4 Americans killed in Benghazi. That was as much Obama’s fault as it was Hillary’s. Reinforcements were requested but they were denied. There was no reason to deny reinforcements. They could’ve saved at least one if not all of the Americans in the embassy, but the victims were denied help. And then, an innocent man was arrested for allegedly putting up a video that supposedly insulted the Islamic barbarians enough to kill people. A video which never existed.
 
Long ago, I wrote an article titled “As Bad As Obama Was, Does He Deserve To Be Jailed?” In it, I delve further into the reasons he should go to jail. But really, you can easily say those were all reasons he should’ve been impeached. If we’re talking about impeaching a president because he’s bad, then why was Obama never even close to being impeached?

Regardless, we move on. The article then talks about how it’s virtually impossible for Trump to be impeached. “The practical problem is that for impeachment to be meaningful, Trump would not just have to be impeached by the House of Representatives (which requires a simple majority) but also removed by the Senate (requiring a two-thirds vote). It’s easy to imagine a scenario where the Democrats win the House of Representatives in 2018 and have the necessary votes for impeachment. But even in that best-case scenario, in which Democrats win every toss-up race for the Senate, they would still be well short of the votes they need in the Senate. Which means that kicking Trump out of the White House by necessity has to be a bipartisan effort with significant Republican buy-in.”
 
He fails to mention that the Vice President also would have to vote to impeach the POTUS.
 
Quoting Peter Beinart of The Atlantic, the article says: “the possibility of Republicans co-operating in removing Trump is dropping even as there’s more evidence [emerging] that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians.”
 
Well, two things about this: First, I’d like to ask: “what evidence?” Believe me, if there was any sort of solid evidence that points to Russian collusion, we’d be hearing about it. We’d definitely know it. So far, the only thing that even remotely comes close to being evidence is the Russian dossier. But that’s all fake as well. It comes close simply because it’s the basis for the entire investigation.
 
Trust me, it doesn’t take a year for the FBI to find a single piece of evidence of a crime (they usually investigate crimes, not people, but still). It doesn’t take the MSM a year of investigation to come up with nothing if there’s clear criminal activity.
 
I’ve been saying this for months now and will likely have to continue saying this until Trump’s 2nd term is over, but if there was any solid piece of evidence of collusion, we’d know about it by now. The MSM has been quick to deliver fake news about this. Could you imagine how quick they’d be to deliver real news about this if it were true? They’d be the only thing in this known universe to exceed the speed of light upon delivering such news.
 
But they haven’t. There’s nothing real about the investigation and the news the MSM reports.
 
Second, the possibility of Republicans co-operating in removing Trump is dropping not because they will “tolerate just about anything from Trump”, as the article writes. That’s the thing, they DON’T tolerate anything from Trump.
 
Over and over again, you hear people like John McCain, Mitt Romney, Lindsay Graham and other RINOs blatantly being AGAINST anything Trump does. What this guy is saying is entirely wrong and false. He continues by saying that “[The GOP] continue to stand with him despite his demented tweeting, the political support he’s given to Roy Moore, his repeated expressions of contempt for the justice system, and his cavalier threats to launch a nuclear war.”
 
That sentence is so insanely wrong I could probably write another article on that sentence alone. We’ve heard multiple times, from the very people listed above, that he should slow down or altogether stop tweeting. They want to shut him down. They don’t want him to be telling the truth to people through social media.
 
They’ve been adamantly against Roy Moore and Trump’s support of him. They’ve been less vocal about it in recent time because other news have filled the media’s time, such as the tax plan. But they still despise the judge.
 
“Repeated expressions of contempt for the justice system”? Are you kidding me? Take the Kate Steinle case. Look at the facts and then tell me the verdict wasn’t utter b.s. Who wouldn’t have contempt for such an “injustice” system?
 
“Cavalier threats to launch a nuclear war”? Why is pushing back against a lunatic dictator considered a threat to launch nuclear war? If a man with a gun threatens to kill you and your family and you point a gun to him to protect yourself and your family, how are you the aggressor in that circumstance? How are you the only one threatening to commit homicide? Kim Jong-un THREATENED US FIRST, YOU MASSIVE IMBECILE! Declaring that there’d be justified retaliation for nuclear action is not threatening nuclear war. THE INITIAL LAUNCH IS!
 
Regardless, he ends his article by saying the Democrats should look to simply defeat Trump at the ballot boxes instead of chasing a pipe dream. Which tells you just how desperate the Democrat Party truly is. You see, THEY CAN’T HOPE TO DO THAT! Yes, they’ll be looking to win in 2018 and 2020. That’s obvious. But their hopes can’t rest on that alone. They’re desperate to regain power in America. They want him out now. They aren’t very hopeful for 2018. Certainly not after this past year of significant elections going to Republicans.
 
There have been a lot of special elections over this past year. Some have happened in California, but that’s not newsworthy because it was expected that the Democrat candidate would win. But in others such as Georgia and Montana, the election was a bit more contested. The winner wasn’t going to be very obvious from the outset. Those are elections the Democrats hoped they would win, had a chance of winning but ultimately lost in.
 
Loss after loss tends to take its toll on the losers. They first thought Hillary would crush Trump or at the very least win, even if it was rather close. That didn’t happen. They then thought they’d crush the GOP candidates in these special elections that were actually significant and that, too, didn’t happen.
 
If they continue to lose in significant elections, they are right to be worried about 2018. Despite all of their b.s. polls about Trump’s popularity, he’s stronger now than he was when he first ran or even won the presidency. I know that there are certain once “Never Trumpers” such as Mark Levin who have changed their tone about Trump since he took office. He’s proven that he’s a conservative man who is working hard every day to Make America Great Again.
 
And the more the Left attacks Trump, the more his supporters embrace him. More than that, more and more people JOIN him.
 
He’s grown stronger while the Democrats have grown weaker. That’s why they’re banking so much on impeachment. It’s their best chance of defeating Trump – which, given what the article of the New Republic tells us, is a rather pathetic chance in and of itself.
 
Jeremiah 29:11
“For I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord, plans for welfare and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope.”
 
Author: Freddie Drake.

Short answer: NO. Like I’ve said in my previous article, Trump is simply too clean and innocent to be found guilty of anything the Left alleges. And that’s because that’s all the Left has: ALLEGATIONS. They have spent half a year investigating a Russian hack or Trump’s collusion with Russia and haven’t found any evidence of either. The Left is conducting investigations simply on what the media ‘reports’. None of what they say is legitimate. That’s the reason we often call them the “Fake News Media”. They report on fake news. They don’t report on facts, they report their own narratives. That’s not journalism, that’s PROPAGANDA!
 
Trump recently took to twitter to voice his opinion on the ‘Russian hack’ allegations. “This is the single greatest witch hunt of a politician in American history!”, followed by another tweet saying: “With all of the illegal acts that took place in the Clinton campaign & the Obama Administration, there was never a special counsel appointed!” On a side note, USA Today wrote an article on these tweets, saying “It was unclear what ‘illegal acts’ Trump was referring to…” Aw, c’mon! We all know what illegal acts he’s referring to. ALL OF THEM! From Benghazi to the e-mails to the IRS investigation of conservative organizations to Fast & Furious!
 
But back to my point, the president is clearly annoyed by the fact that a special counsel was appointed based on complete false accusations of hacking and colluding. But the Left will go to any extent necessary to get Trump out of the White House, with Pence following if they succeed. The problem for the Left is: it’s an IMPOSSIBLE task. Trump is innocent of everything the Left alleges he’s done. To repeat myself: IT’S BEEN HALF A YEAR since the investigation officially began (though, I’m certain Obama ordered an investigation on Trump since the race began) and not a single piece of evidence has surfaced. Not even close.
 
Now, just because the Left can’t come up with any solid evidence of anything doesn’t mean they will give up the pursuit to destroy themsel-… er, I mean, impeach the president. The Left are masters at character assassination. They’ve recently done it to Bill O’Reilly, whom they’ve been trying to get for decades. They even tried it with Sean Hannity with the exact same sexual harassment allegations, but that one fell flat. They’ve been trying forever to do that to Rush Limbaugh, and they’re certainly trying to do it to Trump now.
 
The Left didn’t care all too much about what Trump said or did before the race began. For decades, he’s simply been someone people should aspire to be: a successful business man. He was even friends with many Democrats, but that all changed when he announced his candidacy for president as a Republican. It all changed when he showed himself to be the Donald Trump that would end up running the country. Granted, at first, they thought he was a joke. That he would implode within the year, if not within the first few months. But once the Left came to the realization that he’s a legitimate threat to Obama’s legacy and their agenda, they went full-on ballistic.
 
Trump was only someone to destroy when he was clearly in the way of the Leftist agenda. But to their dismay, there was nothing they could do to stop him. Their candidate was extremely flawed, someone who had a better chance at winning in 2008 than now. They’ve had 8 years of utopia for the Washington establishment and its friends, but a growing concern of a coming dystopia for the rest of the country. And their opponent was someone everyone knew, and thus, many trusted. It wasn’t until the last three weeks of the election that the Left got truly desperate and paid women to make false sexual harassment charges against Trump, which ended up backfiring, expectedly, considering the many atrocities against women that Hillary’s husband had committed.
 
The Left not only had 6 months of FBI investigation into Trump to find evidence of foul play, or shady business transactions, or of a cheating character in Trump. They had about HALF A CENTURY of Trump being in the world’s eye to find some sort of lethal character flaw that would turn off his supporters. Business deals that may have looked shady, scandalous even. But the best thing they found was Trump having a ‘locker-room talk’ with someone during an interview.
 
Trump is one of the cleanest business executives and friend of politicians I’ve ever seen. There aren’t any question marks in Trump’s business life, only in his presidential life, and that’s only because the Left creates those question marks without solid, or even logical evidence.
 
I know for a fact that Trump won’t be impeached, because there’s nothing for anyone to find that would be impeachment-worthy. Not only that, I don’t believe God would allow the man he anointed to be in the White House to be kicked out. Like I said in the previous article: God set things up this way for a reason. He set Trump’s life as it has gone for a reason, and that reason may just be to save this country from falling into the hands of the devil, at least for as long as Trump is president.
 
Just remember this. It’s something that helped me cope with the 2012 election results: No matter who’s president, Jesus is King.
 
Revelation 19:16
“And on His robe and on His thigh He has a name written, ‘King of kings, and Lord of lords.’”
 
Author: Freddie M.