If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!

“GUILTY AS CHARGED”

by Joseph DeMaio, ©2019

“The People’s Court,” “There was no presumption of innocence nor could the defendants adequately represent themselves or consult counsel.”  Source:  Wikipedia

(Nov. 10, 2019) — Once upon a time, in a galaxy right here, where you, faithful P&E reader, are reviewing this post, most Democrats were rational beings.  They actually possessed a sense of fairness, adherence to the rule of law and respect for the Constitution.

No more.

It is probably unfair to cast a blanket indictment over all registered Democrats based on the completely irrational, hateful and plain stupid actions of Democrat “leaders” in the Congress and their complicit enablers in the mainstream media.  Still, but for their being elected to office in the first place by “like-minded” voters – primarily registered Democrats, but with some Independents and “never-Trump RINOs” – the nation would not be as polarized as it has become.  The Democrat leadership in the Congress has become a malignancy on the Constitution, a metastasizing cancer which seeks to undermine and destroy most, if not all, of that which the Founders sought to establish in Philadelphia back in 1787.

In past times, a principled Fourth Estate would have ferreted out and exposed the cancer, leading eventually to its treatment by surgery or chemo.  But that was then, and now is now, with the only principle guiding a once-independent mainstream media being expediency and goose-stepping with the loons now in control of the U.S. House of Representatives.  With each passing day, these miscreants prove – beyond any reasonable doubt – that they are incapable and unqualified to govern a free people in a constitutional republic such as ours and that they must be voted out of office in 2020.  Seriously.

Case in point: the unvarnished stupidity of one Adam Schiff as he “presides” over perhaps one of the most embarrassing and idiotic congressional “hearings” in the history of the nation: the impeachment “inquiry” now taking place in The Swamp seeking to remove President Trump from office.  The Democrats will never… repeat, never ever … forget the deeply humiliating beat-down that Donald Trump delivered to Hillary (“BleachBit?-what’s-BleachBit?”) Clinton in 2016.  Nor will they forgive the electorate for rejecting Clinton.  As they sip their Chardonnay and munch on brie-slathered lavosh, they ponder: “Who do these unwashed, flyover-country rubes think they are, anyway?”

Is House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff abusing his power? Photo: Adam Schiff Facebbook

To label Schiff’s hybrid combination Star Chamber/kangaroo court spasm as an “inquiry,” as if to bestow a patina of legitimacy upon it, is a monumental misnomer.  From all appearances, Schiff intends to run roughshod over all norms of due process, the right of cross-examination and plain old rational thought.  In this respect, his actions seem to be not a great deal unlike those utilized in Nazi Germany in the Volksgerichtshof, or the “People’s Court.“

Indeed, the Wikipedia entry for “kangaroo court” displays on its opening page the image of a bunch of Nazi judge losers doing their “seig heil” salute and describes such proceedings as being held “to give the appearance of a fair and just trial, even though the verdict was already decided before the trial actually began.”  Schiff will not likely gavel in the committee proceedings with that type of flourish…, but one never knows.

In short, Schiff seems intent on converting the name of the committee into the “House Permanent Select Committee on Kangaroos.”  Faithful P&E reader, raise your hand if you think that Schiff’s final report on the “proceedings” of the committee will be anything other than “guilty as charged.”

Moreover, Schiff has recently informed former GOP Chairman of the committee Devin Nunes (R. CA) the he will not allow one of the prime witnesses requested by the Republicans on the committee to testify in open session.

The purported “whistleblower” – reportedly one Eric Ciaramella, whose “complaint” resides at the heart of Schiff’s impeachment fantasy, much like the “Steele Dossier” said to “prove” collusion between President Trump and Russia, but debunked by Robert Mueller –  will not be allowed to be questioned or cross-examined.

Tell me again how that facilitates discovering truth.  Oh…, sorry…, mea culpa… the discovery of the truth is not the objective here.  The objective is concocting a conclusion that, facts (and due process) aside, President Trump must be impeached lest he be re-elected.  My bad.  Sorry.

Ironically, the official “seal” of the committee shows an eagle clutching a bunch of arrows in its left claws and… wait for it… wait for it… a magnifying glass in its right talons.  Really?  The hypocrisy of Schiff purporting to use a magnifying glass to examine only those elements of the issue which will support a conclusion that President Trump is guilty of some “high crime and misdemeanor” while denying to the Republican members of the committee the right to call and question Ciaramella is – literally – a page taken from the typical proceedings of the Volksgerichtshof in Nazi Germany in the lead-up to WW II.

Events did not end well for the folks who presided over the Volksgerichtshof in Germany, and a similar fate hopefully awaits Schiff and the rest of the Democrats now dictating how the House of Representatives will behave in the run-up to the 2020 general election.  The Democrats now controlling the House are acting like the canine in the irreverent high school conundrum: Q:  “Why does a dog lick itself? ”   A. “Because it can.”

Do not let dogs dictate how to run your life, because you will regret it.   Vote rationally and carefully in 2020.

 

Join the Conversation

1 Comment

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. In Playland a coin has but two sides, but in the real world it has three. On one side there is Democracy, the other side Despotism while the edge is balanced between what we think of as “rational” and “irrational” choices.

    The other side, the ones who we view as destroyers of the Constitution, views our side as the bad guys for our “freedom of speech” and “equal rights under the law”.

    We don’t wish death upon the other side, although the other side wishes death upon us. I think it’s about time we wish the same to them as they wish upon us, at least then we’ll have something in common, a baseline in which to start a dialog.

    Seems impossible? It is and to expect otherwise is to become irrational ourselves.

    Professor Zorkophsky