Where’s the “quid pro quo?”  Look at “quid pro Joe!”

ajoe 9

Now that the impeachment attempt (the coup attempt) against President Trump has failed miserably for the democrats…, what are we left with?

ajoe 8

I’m sure we’ll have a pathetic vote in Congress to still impeach the president, even though their witch hunt (part two) failed to uncover ANYTHING President Trump actually did wrong.

ajoe 12

The Senate will then dispatch the fraudulent impeachment fairy tale in short order, and the democrats will be left to concoct yet another anti-Trump fairy tale.

The democrats and their co-conspirators, the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media,” will not be getting the impeachment of The President for Christmas!

They have not been very nice, but rather quite naughty!

Quite a few democrats and fake news journalists” will be finding coal (“beautiful clean burning coal”) in their Christmas stockings this year!

I also have a feeling that the upcoming Senate hearings and the newly announced investigations by the Ukrainian government will combine to make 2020 a bad year for Joe and Hunter Biden, the democrats, and the deep state in general.

ajoe 1

It’s a wonderful life!

I’d like to refer you to my blog from November 6, 2019 titled, “This is how President Trump could destroy Joe Biden in a debate in about 5 minutes:”

https://mrericksonrules.com/2019/11/06/this-is-how-president-trump-could-destroy-joe-biden-in-a-debate-in-about-5-minutes/

ajoe 5

ajoe 4

With the Inspector General’s report dealing with FISA court abuses, and U.S. Attorney John Durham’s criminal inquiry into the origins of the Russia investigation results coming out just in time for Christmas, 2020 is shaping up to be a bad year for the democrats, which will be capped by another crushing defeat at the hands of President Trump and all of the loyalist American deplorables!

ajoe 16

ajoe 14

WINNING!!!

KEEP AMERICA GREAT!

USA! USA! USA!

ajoe 13

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

“SOME HAVE ARGUED THAT A PRESIDENT HAS THE ABILITY TO NOMINATE OR REMOVE ANY AMBASSADOR HE WANTS, AND THAT THEY SERVE AT THE PLEASURE OF THE PRESIDENT.  AND THAT IS TRUE,” Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said.

SO WHAT’S THE PROBLEM HERE???!!!

Marie Yovanovich can cry all she wants about losing her job…, a job she apparently feels entitled to, but the bottom line is…,

“SOME HAVE ARGUED THAT A PRESIDENT HAS THE ABILITY TO NOMINATE OR REMOVE ANY AMBASSADOR HE WANTS, AND THAT THEY SERVE AT THE PLEASURE OF THE PRESIDENT.  AND THAT IS TRUE,” Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said.

ayovan 4

In other words, President Trump doesn’t have to have any particular reason for replacing Ms. Yovanovich.  Maybe he didn’t like her looks.  Maybe he didn’t like her attitude.  Maybe whatever.

ayovan 8

Again…,

“SOME HAVE ARGUED THAT A PRESIDENT HAS THE ABILITY TO NOMINATE OR REMOVE ANY AMBASSADOR HE WANTS, AND THAT THEY SERVE AT THE PLEASURE OF THE PRESIDENT.  AND THAT IS TRUE,” Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said.

SO WHAT IS THE PROBLEM HERE???!!!

WHAT DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH THE IMPEACHMENT OF THE PRESIDENT, WHEN “SHIFTY” SCHIFF HIMSELF ACKNOWLEDGES THAT, “A PRESIDENT HAS THE ABILITY TO NOMINATE OR REMOVE ANY AMBASSADOR HE WANTS, AND THAT THEY SERVE AT THE PLEASURE OF THE PRESIDENT.  AND THAT IS TRUE.”

Alex Pappas of Fox News reported that, “Marie Yovanovitch, the former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, pointed her finger at Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani while detailing her sudden removal from her diplomatic post during Friday’s nationally-televised impeachment testimony, as President Trump fired back at the diplomat and said every place she worked ‘turned bad.’”

ayovan 3

“During her appearance, Yovanovitch, a career diplomat who served both Republican and Democratic presidents, relayed her story of being suddenly recalled by Trump in May, saying she believes Giuliani played a key role in telling people she was not sufficiently supportive of the president.”

ayovan 2

“SOME HAVE ARGUED THAT A PRESIDENT HAS THE ABILITY TO NOMINATE OR REMOVE ANY AMBASSADOR HE WANTS, AND THAT THEY SERVE AT THE PLEASURE OF THE PRESIDENT.  AND THAT IS TRUE,” Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said.

ayovan 6

‘“I do not understand Mr. Giuliani’s motives for attacking me, nor can I offer an opinion on whether he believed the allegations he spread about me,’ Yovanovitch said.”

Where is it written that Ms. Yovanovich must be able to understand the motives for anyone attacking her?

Perception is reality, Ms. Yovanovich.

“She argued the efforts against her by the president’s allies hindered her work.”

Again…, so what?  What’s your point?

‘“If our chief representative is kneecapped, it limits our effectiveness to safeguard the vital national security interests of the United States,’ Yovanovitch said.”

BINGO!

You couldn’t handle your duties effectively, for whatever reason.

Perhaps this is why you were removed?

“After the hearing started, Trump began attacking her, tweeting, ‘Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad.’ He added, ‘It is a U.S. President’s absolute right to appoint ambassadors.’”

Again…, “Shifty” Schiff agrees with you Mr. President…,

“SOME HAVE ARGUED THAT A PRESIDENT HAS THE ABILITY TO NOMINATE OR REMOVE ANY AMBASSADOR HE WANTS, AND THAT THEY SERVE AT THE PLEASURE OF THE PRESIDENT.  AND THAT IS TRUE,” Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said.

“At the same time the hearing began Friday, the White House released a new transcript of the president’s first call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, which showed Trump agreeing to meet with Ukraine’s president-elect — without preconditions — in the first official phone call between the two leaders.”

“Intelligence Committee ranking member Devin Nunes, R-Calif., read the entire letter in his opening statement. A separate call between the two leaders ignited the impeachment inquiry, and Republicans suggested the new transcript is helpful to the president’s argument he did nothing wrong in his conversations with Zelensky.”

“Yovanovitch’s removal is one of several events at the center of the impeachment effort.”

“SOME HAVE ARGUED THAT A PRESIDENT HAS THE ABILITY TO NOMINATE OR REMOVE ANY AMBASSADOR HE WANTS, AND THAT THEY SERVE AT THE PLEASURE OF THE PRESIDENT.  AND THAT IS TRUE,” Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said.

SO AGAIN, WHAT IS THE PROBLEM HERE???!!!

‘“These events should concern everyone in this room,’ Yovanovitch said in her opening remarks. ‘Shady interests the world over have learned how little it takes to remove an American ambassador who does not give them what they want.’”

ayovan 5

Again…,

“SOME HAVE ARGUED THAT A PRESIDENT HAS THE ABILITY TO NOMINATE OR REMOVE ANY AMBASSADOR HE WANTS, AND THAT THEY SERVE AT THE PLEASURE OF THE PRESIDENT.  AND THAT IS TRUE,” Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said.

SO AGAIN, WHAT IS THE PROBLEM HERE???!!!

“Democrats have worked to connect the circumstances of Yovanovitch’s ouster to Trump’s alleged pressure campaign to enlist Zelensky in the effort to damage 2020 rival Joe Biden.”

“SOME HAVE ARGUED THAT A PRESIDENT HAS THE ABILITY TO NOMINATE OR REMOVE ANY AMBASSADOR HE WANTS, AND THAT THEY SERVE AT THE PLEASURE OF THE PRESIDENT.  AND THAT IS TRUE,” Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said.

SO AGAIN, WHAT IS THE PROBLEM HERE???!!!

“The question before us is not whether Donald Trump could recall an American ambassador with a stellar reputation for fighting corruption in Ukraine, but why would he want to?”

Does it matter?

If you believe that, “A PRESIDENT HAS THE ABILITY TO NOMINATE OR REMOVE ANY AMBASSADOR HE WANTS, AND THAT THEY SERVE AT THE PLEASURE OF THE PRESIDENT,” the “why” is irrelevant.

“It’s unfortunate that today, and for most of next week, we will continue engaging in the Democrats’ day-long TV spectacles instead of solving the problems we were all sent to Washington to address,” Nunes said.

In particular, Yovanovitch and others have described Giuliani, Trump’s personal lawyer, as leading what one called an “irregular channel” outside the diplomatic mainstream of U.S.-Ukraine relations.

Giuliani and others had claimed Yovanovitch was not supportive of the president and that she had criticized him to others. Trump, in a conversation with Zelensky, referred to her as “bad news.”

Asked on Friday what she thought of those comments from Trump, she said, “I couldn’t believe it. Shocked appalled. Devastated.”

“Schiff claimed Friday she was ‘too tough on corruption for some, and her principled stance made her enemies’ and it became clear Trump ‘wanted her gone.’”

Like they would say in a real court, “Objection, your honor, that’s an opinion,” and the judge would say, “Sustained,” meaning it isn’t admissible.

Yovanovich is just another liberal tool who is confused about where her loyalty should lay.

“Lawmakers, as they have in previous meetings, on Friday clashed with each other over procedure. Before the testimony began Friday, Schiff shut down New York Republican Rep. Elise Stefanik after Stefanik asked if he would “continue to prohibit witnesses from answering Republican questions.” Schiff said it wasn’t a ‘proper’ point of order, and then declined to recognize Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan who also tried to raise a parliamentary question.”

ayovan 10

Such is life in the “People’s Republic of The Liberal Swamp!”

ayovan 9

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

What do you call government employees who are working against our president?

Un-American?

Anti-American?

Treasonous?

How about traitors?

During this whole impeachment “inquiry” process, I find it amazing to see how brazenly political and unapologetic these unelected government workers are in their opposition to our president, President Donald J. Trump.

aemps 4

Disagreeing with the policies of our president is one thing, but disregarding his wishes, plotting resistance to him behind his back and generally trying to impede his progress is treasonous in my mind.

aemps 3

These government employees are quite mistaken if they think they are acting in the best interests of our country.

aemps 10

They were not elected by anyone.

President Trump was elected by the people to represent us and do what he thinks is in the best interests of our country.

If anyone is working against him, they are working against us and the country.

They are by definition committing treason and should be charged as such.

Merely losing their jobs should go without saying.

According to Charles Creitz of Fox News, “White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham slammed the House Democrats’ impeachment inquiry Wednesday, suggesting that Foreign Service officials should resign if unprepared to carry out orders based on President Trump’s constitutionally recognized powers.”

“Grisham told ‘Tucker Carlson Tonight’ host Tucker Carlson he was correct when he claimed a number of State Department officials did not seem on board with Trump’s brand of foreign policy.”

‘“There is no reason that anybody in our government across our administration should be actively working against the president, especially a president that is doing so well for the country,’ Grisham said.”

“In response, Carlson said his interpretation of the Constitution tells him that ‘legitimacy comes from votes’ in a democracy, so the president, as elected head-of-state, has the power to determine foreign policy.”

‘“Aren’t they constitutionally bound to carry out the foreign policy of the president?’ he asked of Foreign Service officials.”

‘“Absolutely,’ Grisham replied. ‘If they aren’t ready to do that then they need to resign.  It’s as simple as that.’”

Like I said before, it’s not “as simple as that.”  These people need to be held accountable for their treasonous actions.

“In addition, Grisham ripped a Chicago Democratic lawmaker who interrogated witnesses at Wednesday’s impeachment hearing.”

“Rep. Mike Quigley, D-Ill., claimed ‘hearsay’ evidence is sometimes more important than direct evidence.”

‘“A primer on hearsay: I think the American public needs to be reminded that countless people have been convicted on hearsay, because the courts have routinely allowed and created, needed exceptions to hearsay,’ he said, in an apparent reference to Republicans’ comments that witnesses George Kent and William Taylor Jr. did not have first-hand knowledge of Trump’s Ukraine phone call.”

aemps 1

I would argue they didn’t have much “knowledge” in general.

“Quigley continued: ‘Hearsay can be much better evidence than direct as we have learned in painful instances.’”

aemps 11

“Grisham dismissed the claim, telling Carlson, ‘I don’t know how that’s even possible.’”

In response, all I can say is, “Mr. Quigley…, a friend of one my friends claims to have heard one of your staffers admit that you confessed to being an idiot.”

Now there’s some hearsay I may be inclined to believe!

‘“Today was a joke [referring to the impeachment inquiry hearing],’ she [Grisham] added. ‘It was all a sham.’”

I would tend to agree Ms. Grisham.

aemps 5

What we had was a political circus, with a main event, complete with liberal clowns, however, the “stars of the show” were a real flop and not as good as they were billed to be.

aemps 8

aemps 7

The next “star” appearing in the center ring is Marie Yovanovich, who was ousted from her post (former US Ambassador to Ukraine) back in April, so she wasn’t around for many of the key events of this “impeachment fairy tale,.” but she is apparently willing to bash the president and bombard us with more opinion and hearsay.

aemps 2

WINNING!

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

The “liberal lexicon” according to MrEricksonRules.

When we listen to democrats, it is important to really understand what they’re saying and what they mean.

alex 11

alex 5

Feel free to use my “liberal lexicon” to aid you in your understanding of our deceptive and deceitful opposition.

 

African-Americans = fools we assume will vote for us no matter what

Anonymous source = I just made this up

Bipartisan = when there are enough stupid republicans to go along with the democrats on an issue or a law

Border Patrol = people who impede probable democrat voters from coming to America

Collusion = an act of inappropriate cooperation that can only be performed by a conservative

The Constitution = that annoying document that stops us from doing what we really want to do

Democracy = socialism

Democrat = anti-American socialist

The Democrat party = elite white liberals who put up with minorities in order to get elected

Election = an opportunity to hijack governmental power

Evidence = a desire to push a false narrative

The Founding Fathers = the racists who created our country

Free = paid for with other people’s money

Freedom of religion = free to be anything other than a Christian

Freedom of speech = speech which liberals deem appropriate

Freedom of the press = freedom to lie for a “good” reason

The Government = the people who know what’s better for you than you do

Greed = a selfish desire for something, which can only be associated with capitalism and/or conservatives

Higher education = liberal indoctrination

Hispanic-Americans = referring only to the unemployed or illegal Hispanics

Invest = redistribute wealth

Law abiding people = neo-nazis

Liberals = socialist wannabes

Liberalism = fascism

Mainstream media = the propaganda arm of the democrat party

Misremembered = conveniently forgot or lied

Misspoke = lied

The National Anthem = Conservatives’ racist/imperialistic theme song

“Our conservative friends” = “Our mortal enemies”

Patriots = “deep state” and “establishment” “tools” who put their party before the country

The Pledge of Allegiance = the pledge of right-wing, globalist enemies

The Police = annoying people who harass our illegal potential voters

Polls = fabricated statistics used to support a desired outcome

Poverty level = the level democrats desire all people to be at or below

Racist = anyone who doesn’t agree with me

Raising awareness = propaganda regarding a narrative

Recollection = a self-serving and manufactured memory

Refugees = probable future democrat voters

Safe zone = constitutional rights free zone

Sanctuary = area free of laws

Scandal = an inappropriate or illegal action which is attempted to be covered-up, but which can only be associated with a conservative or a conservative administration.

Taken out of context = you heard it or read it correctly

“The rich” = anyone with a job or retired from a job

Undocumented immigrants = probable future democrat voters

Unethical – that which is deemed unethical exclusively by the democrat party.  Democrats are incapable of unethical behavior.

The United States military = Imperialist American Forces

Watchdog = liberal activist

Whistleblower = unaccountable co-conspirator

White supremacist = any white person who isn’t a liberal

 

I hope this “liberal lexicon” helps make democrat-speak a little more understandable for you in the future.

If you have any other terms that you’d like to suggest for my liberal lexicon, please drop me a line!

alex 13

alex 9

alex 10

alex 2

alex 3

alex 18

alex 14

alex 15

alex 12

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

Well, well, well.  The “liberal chickens” are certainly coming home to roost, regarding the democrats’ whistleblower.  

According to Victor Morton of The Washington Times, “The attorney representing the Ukraine whistleblower tweeted about starting a “coup” against President Trump that would end with his impeachment almost as soon as he took the oath of office.”

Hmmm, you don’t say?

Only 10 days after President Trump’s inauguration ceremony, “Mark S. Zaid wrote on his certified Twitter account on Jan. 30, 2017, Mr. Trump’s 11th day in power, “#coup has started. First of many steps. #rebellion. #impeachment will follow ultimately. #lawyers https://t.co/FiNBQo6v0S — Mark S. Zaid (@MarkSZaidEsq) January 31, 2017’”

azaid 16

I notice Zaid uses “Esq” in his twitter “handle,” or user name.  The usage of “Esq” seems pretty haughty.  “Esq.” is an abbreviation for esquire, which is a title used by attorneys in the United States. The term esquire has a different meaning in English Law.  It is a title used to signify dignity, which ranks above gentleman and directly below knight.            It is a title of respect accorded to men of higher social rank.

I only mention this because this is a common liberal trait…, thinking they are better than or above the rest of us…, of a “higher social rank.”

It just helps understand where Mr. Zaid Esq. is coming from.

“Mr. Zaid’s tweet was in response to the firing of Sally Yates as acting attorney general for refusing to follow Mr. Trump’s orders on immigration policy.”

It was at this point that the treasonous members of the deep state realized they weren’t running the show, and they didn’t like it!

“Mr. [President] Trump referred to the story at a campaign rally in Louisiana on Wednesday night, calling the attorney a ‘sleaze ball.’”

Nicely put, Mr. President!

‘“It’s all a hoax, it’s a scam,’ the president said.”

“According to a report on Fox News, Mr. Zaid also repeatedly crowed about how ‘we’ and the media will force Mr. Trump from office.”

‘“I predict @CNN will play a key role in @realDonaldTrump not finishing out his full term as president,’ he wrote in one tweet and ‘we will get rid of him, and this country is strong enough to survive even him and his supporters’ in another.”

“Both tweets were posted in July 2017, almost two years before Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was even in office to speak with Mr. Trump on the phone.”

“The Trump reelection campaign said the tweets prove that Democrats’ complaints about impeachable offenses have always been about bad-faith searches for a pretext.”

They also add additional proof that there actually was, and is, a treasonous deep state community that needs to be dealt with…, with extreme prejudice.

“Added Donald Trump Jr.: ‘Of course he did. Everyone knows the coup started on November 9, 2016. Quit your fake sanctimony! Everybody who’s been watching this [b.s.] for three years sees what a farce it has been all along.’”

Gregg Re of Fox News reported, “Trump hits whistleblower attorney’s 2017 plan for a ‘coup’ against his administration.”

“President Trump, at a [Keep America Great] campaign rally in Louisiana Wednesday night, unloaded on whistleblower attorney Mark Zaid, after a Fox News article from earlier in the day revealed that Zaid had tweeted about the beginning of a ‘coup’ against the president back in 2017.”

“The president extensively quoted from the article, which reported that Zaid has long called for Trump’s impeachment — even promising two years ago, ‘We will get rid of him.’”

“Zaid now represents the intelligence community whistleblower who is at the center of Democrats’ impeachment inquiry against the president. The whistleblower has alleged that, earlier this year, Trump improperly threatened to withhold aid to Ukraine for political reasons.”

‘“Democrats must be accountable for their hoaxes and their crimes,’ Trump said, holding a printout of the Fox News piece.”

‘“I don’t know if you saw, I’m just coming off the plane, and they hand me — look at this character. They just hand me this story, “’Coup has started,” whistleblower attorney said in 2017.’”

azaid 1

“Trump added: ‘That was a long time ago.  It’s all a hoax.  They say, January 2017 — a “coup has started,” and the “impeachment will follow ultimately.”  It’s all a hoax. It’s a scam. And, you know who helps them? These people back here — the media.’”

“And, amid a slew of impeachment-related posts, Zaid assured his Twitter followers that ‘as one falls, two more will take their place,’ apparently referring to Trump administration employees defying the White House.”

‘“Can you believe this?” Trump asked. ‘Just came out. It’s a disgrace. These people are bad people. They rip the guts out of our country.’”

“Trump also hammered The Washington Post, saying, ‘19 minutes after I took the oath of office, the horrible, disgusting Washington Post — which is a terrible paper — an article comes out, ‘The campaign to impeach President Trump has begun.’”

‘“Is there any place you would rather be than a Trump rally, on a beautiful evening in Louisiana?’ Trump asked, as the crowd chanted, ‘lock her up,’ and cheered.”

My answer is ‘no.”  I know I enjoy your rallies, Mr. President, and I wish I could have been there.

“Over a thousand people were gathered outside the Monroe Civic Center early Wednesday morning, and over 40,000 people obtained tickets for the event!”

Now…, regarding our pathetic, “hearsay” whistleblower…, Dr. Sebastian Gorka tweeted that the alleged “whistleblower” is believed to be, one, Eric Ciaramella.

azaid 9

Parts of Mr. Ciaramella’s “illustrious resume” include:

Protégé of former CIA Director, John “the treasonous turd” Brennan.  Brennan was also the one who sent him to work in The White House during Obama’s reign.

Ciaramella also worked for Susan “the puppet” Rice.

He travelled with and advised then Vice President “sleepy, creepy” Joe Biden on The Ukraine.

Well…, you get the picture.

azaid 10

“Ciaramella.”  That sounds like some kind of sickness or disease, like salmonella!

Maybe we should adopt that name as the disease of the liberal mind?!

azaid 15

Is it just me, or do these tweezer necked, sissy boy, liberal turds all look the same?

azaid 11

The question is was there a whistleblower looking for an attorney or was there a congressman (“Shifty” Adam Schiff) and an attorney looking for a willing accomplice and a whistleblower?

I would tend to believe it was the latter.

azaid 4

azaid 8

In either case…, it appears the democrats are becoming less and less interested in allowing their whistleblower to testify or be cross examined.  I wonder why that is?

WINNING!

azaid 12

azaid 13

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

This is how President Trump could destroy Joe Biden in a debate in about 5 minutes.

The democrats and the fake news media are accusing President Trump of a “quid pro quo” arrangement with the Ukrainian president, and attempting to impeach him for it.

In case you’re not familiar with it, “quid pro quo” is a Latin term…, “quid” meaning “money,” “pro” meaning “for, and “quo” meaning “something received.”

Let’s fast forward to a potential presidential debate during the fall of 2020.

adebate 3

President Trump is giving his opening statement:

“I’m sure you’re aware, Joe, of what you and your democrat friends tried, and failed, to impeach me for.”

“They tried to imply that I threatened the Ukrainian president, which I didn’t, with a withholding of funds, which we didn’t, if he failed to investigate your possible corruption prior to the 2016 election, which he didn’t do.”

“It’s pretty hard to have a “quid pro quo” arrangement, Joe, when there is no “quid” and there is no “quo.”

“You, Joe, are on tape, however, bragging about doing EXACTLY what you and your friends accused me of doing.”

adebate 5

“You said, and I’ll read your EXACT quote.  You said, ‘I said, I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars. I said, you’re not getting the billion. I’m going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. He got fired.’”

“Now THAT, Joe, is a textbook example of the president of The Ukraine being threatened with a “quid pro quo.”

“What you actually DID is what you and your friends, and the fake news media, tried to hang on me.”

adebate 2

“You not only admitted it in your own words, but you bragged about it!  And all of your friends there in the fake news media laughed about it!”

“None of your democrat friends or the fake news media seemed to have any problems with what you DID, but they spent the last 6 months fighting to breathe life into the hoax that I did what you actually did.”

“And you and your democrat friends will not admit that the fake news, mainstream media, is an arm of the democrat party used for liberal propaganda, when it is quite obvious they are.”

“In my opinion, we can bypass any investigation involving you and Ukraine and proceed right to the sentencing phase.  You obviously broke multiple laws and you publicly confessed to breaking those laws.”

“Secondly, we have the events surrounding your son, Hunter, Joe.”

adebate 4

“Here we have a young man who flies into China with you on Air Force Two, and somehow flies home with millions of dollars in his investment fund.  Then he ends up being put on the board of a Ukrainian gas company and gets paid over $50 thousand a month.  Both of these countries being places where you have quite a bit of influence, being The Vice President of The United States.  But you claim to have no knowledge of any of his activities.”

adebate 8

“I’m not even going to argue the legality or the appropriateness of any of that right now, Joe.”

“But I am going to ask the American people to please stop and consider what I’m about to say.”

“Suppose my sons, Eric or Don Jr., or my daughters, Ivanka or Tiffany, were involved in some sweetheart deals like your son, Hunter?”

adebate 6

“What do you think your democrat friends or the fake news media would have to say about that?”

“I think they all would have lost their minds and would have launched endless investigations into my children and I.”

“Seriously, it would have been an absolute circus.”

“Can anybody even argue that assumption?”

adebate 7

“Now I ask the American people, why does the fake news media choose to look the other way in Hunter Biden’s, your son’s case, Joe, but you know darn well they would absolutely crucify my children and I?”

“It’s not just a bias, Joe…, it’s a concerted effort to misinform and manipulate the American people.”

adebate 9

“It’s like I said before, you and your democrat friends will not admit that the fake news, mainstream media, is an arm of the democrat party used for liberal propaganda, when it is quite obvious they are.”

“I am appealing to the American people to recognize what has been going on here with the fake news media.  Hold them accountable, and demand that they report the news fairly and honestly on your behalf and in your interests…, not the best interest of just one party…, the democrat party.”

And that is how President Trump destroys Joe Biden, the democrat party, and the liberal propaganda, fake news media within 5 minutes of their first debate.

And you don’t have to take my word for what Vice President Biden said at the time…, you can watch the actual video of Biden bragging about his “quid pro quo” below.  Put your cursor on the link, press the “Ctrl” key and click with your mouse.

https://youtu.be/Q0_AqpdwqK4

Hey…, the democrats are the ones who decided to open up this can of worms…, and these worms ain’t going back in the can!

Remember democrats, be careful what you wish for, because you just might get it.

WINNING!

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

“Stupid is as stupid does…,” and stupid is as stupid says as well, regarding these crazy, double-talking democrats!

By definition, a “lynching” is “a mob killing someone, especially by hanging, for an alleged offense with or without a legal trial.”

According to Joseph A. Wulfsohn of Fox News, “President Trump draws fire for calling impeachment inquiry ‘a lynching.’”

bidenlynch 8

I’m sorry Mr. Wulfson, but isn’t your headline a little redundant?

I mean, is there anything The President has said that didn’t “draw fire” from democrats and their partners in crime, the fake news media?

bidenlynch 1

Anyway…, moving on…

“[President] Trump’s ‘lynching’ tweet provokes strong reactions; chief White House correspondent John Roberts reports.”

“[President] Trump was widely criticized for claiming on Twitter that Republicans are witnessing a ‘lynching.’ Several 2020 Democrats piled on the president, including the 2020 frontrunner.”

bidenlynch 10

So all of these liberals are denying President Trump the right to identify as someone who is being lynched?

Just sayin’.

By definition, I would have to say that President Trump’s remarks, about the democrats’ attempt to impeach him being a “lynching,” are exactly on the mark.

The democrats are trying “to kill” his reputation and presidency, without actually voting to begin the impeachment process, while holding secret witness hearings, without allowing The President’s defense team to defend him or cross examine the witnesses, which is without precedent.

This is most definitely unfair to say the least, and most probably unconstitutional and illegal.

The word “lynching” does not have to carry racist undertones with it.  The definition of “lynching,” according to Merriam-Webster, makes no mention of slaves, slavery, Blacks, or African-Americans in its definition at all. Democrats just want us to perceive it that way, as they do, through their racially divisive lenses.

Many people, of all races, cultures and religions, in our country’s past, have been lynched while being accused of committing various crimes.

bidenlynch 20

‘“Impeachment is not “lynching,” it is part of our Constitution,’ [former Vice President and 2020 democrat presidential candidate] Joe Biden reacted. ‘Our country has a dark, shameful history with lynching, and to even think about making this comparison is abhorrent.  It’s despicable.’”

Okay…, everyone take note now…, “Sleepy” Joe says, “Making this comparison [impeachment to lynching] is abhorrent.  It’s despicable.”

bidenlynch 6

“However, CNN unearthed an interview Biden did on the network in 1998, where he used the term he blasted Trump for.”

Way to go CNN!

Holding a democrats’ feet to the fire is not like you at all!  “Sleepy, creepy Uncle” Joe must be falling out of favor among the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media” and the fascist liberal powers that be.

bidenlynch 2

‘“Even if the president should be impeached, history will question whether or not this was a partisan lynching or whether or not it was something that in fact met the standard,’ then-Sen. Biden told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, ‘the very high bar that was set by the founders as to what constituted an impeachable offense.’”

“Abhorrent…, despicable!!!”  In your own words, “Sleepy” Joe.

“Stupid is as stupid does…,” and stupid is as stupid says as well, regarding these crazy, double-talking democrats!

“As his unearthed remarks went viral, Biden offered an apology … but continued to hammer Trump by insisting he ‘chose his words deliberately.’”

Please note that only democrats are allowed to “issue an apology” and be absolved of their sins.

‘“This wasn’t the right word to use and I’m sorry about that,’ Biden tweeted. ‘Trump on the other hand chose his words deliberately today in his use of the word lynching and continues to stoke racial divides in this country daily.’”

Excuse me…, what?

bidenlynch 3

Sooooo…, when President Trump speaks he “chooses his words deliberately,” but when you speak you don’t?

bidenlynch 4

How does that work exactly “Sleepy” Joe?

“Stupid is as stupid does…,” and stupid is as stupid says as well, regarding these crazy, double-talking democrats!

“Biden was one of several Democratic lawmakers who used the term ‘lynching’ in the past, including now-Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y, and Rep. Gregory Meeks, D-N.Y.”

bidenlynch 5

This, my friends, is what happens when misinformed and confused people elect other disingenuous and confused people.

Stay thirsty my friends…, but remember…, don’t drink the liberal Kool Aide!

bidenlynch 9

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

 

Here we go again with claims of “phantom” future evidence against The President!

ed 1

For over two years we heard from the democrats about how Robert “the clueless tool” Mueller was going to destroy President Trump.

They spent 30-40 million dollars, issued over 2,500 subpoenas, and came up with NOTHING!

NOTHING!

ed 5

ed 4

ed 6

We heard daily from the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media” about all of this other evidence that was going to surface, which never did.  NOTHING!

NOTHING!

ed 7

ed 8

We heard regularly from “shifty” Adam Schiff, and how he had all of this evidence showing criminal activity against The President, which never managed to make an appearance.  NOTHING!

NOTHING!

ed 10

ed 2

Now we have another baseless, bogus investigation of The President and his call with the Ukrainian president, and we have another liberal liar, making libelous claims about supposed criminal activity, and referring to “evidence,” which in reality is nothing but wishful thinking.

According to Joshua Nelson of Fox News, “President Trump ‘committed a crime by soliciting the Ukraine government to get involved in the U.S. election,’ the former DNC Chairman and Pennsylvania Governor, ‘Mister Ed’ Rendell told ‘America’s Newsroom.’”

ed 3

Your level of confusion is impressive “Mister Ed!”

President Trump was referring to events that occurred prior to the 2016 election, not about events leading up to the 2020 election.

‘“I think we got to watch what rolls out in the next month or so. I think there’s more evidence to come and I think as the evidence rolls out, it’s going to become more and more clear that the president not only broke the law here but he abused his power at the detriment of the United States of America,’ Rendell said.”

Yes, “Mister Ed,” you do have to “watch what rolls out in the next month or so,” because that’s all you have to pin your hopes on!

NOTHING has managed to “roll out” so far!

NOTHING!

“I think as the evidence rolls out, it’s going to become more and more clear that the president not only broke the law here but he abused his power.”

WHERE, AND HOW MANY TIMES, HAVE WE HEARD THAT LINE BEFORE!!!

I swear…, the democrats must really think we’re all idiots.

They sure are sticking with the fascists’ playbook, however.

“If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.” – Adolf Hitler

And…,

“Accuse the other side of that which you are guilty.” – Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s Nazi Propaganda Minister

This is when the democrats typically roll out Ed Rendell…, when they want some “tool” or “party flunky” to regurgitate the latest liberal narrative, and keep “the lie” alive.

‘“There is not a trace of evidence that the Bidens did anything wrong and in my judgment — and I was district attorney for eight years — the president committed a crime,’ he [Rendell] said.”

OHHHH, NOOOO!

Joe Biden didn’t do anything wrong, except come out and say he did EXACTLY what the democrats are accusing President Trump of doing…, which he didn’t do!

Unbelievable.

“Your judgement,” Mr. Rendell, is about as valuable as a ticket to that failed Bill and Hillary Clinton show, which they ended up giving tickets away to, and then actually paid people to go in order to save some face.

ed12

Nothing at all like a Trump rally, hey Hill?

ed 13

On a related note…, “House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., called [‘Shifty’ Adam] Schiff a ‘patriot.’”

The first question that comes to mind is a “patriot” for what country?  The People’s Republic of California?  Certainly not The United States of America.

ed 11

“The intelligence committee chairman [‘Shifty’ Adam Schiff] has admitted he should have been clearer about his contact with the ‘whistleblower’ who filed a complaint about Trump’s July phone call with the Ukrainian president.”

Which really means he should have been more careful so as not to have been caught!

“Schiff [then] recited what he later called a ‘parody’ reading of ‘the call’ at a House hearing, drawing harsh criticism from Republicans.”

ed 9

This “parody,” as he now calls his comments before a congressional hearing, were never prefaced as such.  We were led to believe Schiff was quoting what the President had said on the call.  That was until The President released an actual transcript of the call, forcing “Shifty” Adam Schiff to eat his words.

Words must not have many calories…, because Congressman Schiff has been eating a lot of his words lately…, and yet he is still so skinny!

WINNING!

ed 15

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

What if a new “whistleblower” “blew the whistle” on the two original “whistleblowers?”

Hey…, one good “whistle blow” deserves another…, don’t you agree?

blowers 7

First off…, what exactly is a “whistleblower?”

According to Merriam-Webster, a “whistleblower” is, “an employee who brings wrongdoing by an employer or other employees to the attention of a government or law enforcement agency and who is commonly vested by statute with rights and remedies for retaliation.”

In this case, the “statute with rights and remedies for retaliation” is The Whistleblower Protection Act.  “The Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 is a United States federal law that protects federal whistleblowers who work for the government and report the possible existence of an activity constituting a violation of law, rules, or regulations, or mismanagement, gross waste of funds, abuse of authority or a substantial and specific danger to public health and safety.

I feel a case could be made against the two original whistleblowers that their partisan, premeditated, disingenuous, frivolous and fraudulent claims, could be considered a “gross waste of funds,” not to mention an illegitimate attempt to harm the reputation and effectiveness of a sitting president.

How much taxpayer money is being wasted here?

The Mueller witch hunt is said to have wasted well over $200 million.

And if that’s what they said it costed, then it was probably twice that!

If this impeachment hoax/circus goes on much longer, I’m sure it won’t take long before it approaches tens of millions of dollars as well.

It has become pretty apparent that the whistleblowers coordinated their complaints with impeach-happy democrat members of Congress, in order to continue to harass and impede President Trump.

blowers 8

It’s a shame that the democrats stooped low enough to use the whistleblower system as their chosen method to attack The President this time.

The whistleblower program is a well-intentioned law that has been co-opted by the democrats in order to try and “insulate” their accusers from any kind of cross examination or repercussions.

blowers 11

I must admit that it was an imaginative scheme.

The only problem is the democrats chose to “blow the whistle” on President Trump for something the Obama administration and Vice-President Biden actually did!

Ha!  What a bunch of maroons!

blowers 10

blowers 5

blowers 4

blowers 1

blowers 6

Then…, Nancy Pelosi chose to start her unofficial impeachment inquiry based on the whistleblower’s second hand, hearsay, knowledge, a day before President Trump released an actual transcript of the conversation in question, showing there was nothing referred to that could be considered improper at all.

blowers 13

Like they say, “Stupid is as stupid does.” – Forrest Gump

blowers 3

It will be interesting to see how the democrats choose to try and save some face.

The democrats have made their filthy bed, and now they want push everyone into it.

They don’t even want to lie in it!

Will Ms. Pelosi pull the impeachment plug on “the fairy tale impeachment,” or will she and her co-conspirators choose to double down and come up with even more lies and disinformation?

Stay tuned for the next episode of “As the Stomach Turns!”

WINNING!

blowers 9

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑