“If we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said that.”

This contradiction of verbiage by Robert “Droopy” Mueller was muttered last Wednesday in his “resignation speech” at the Department of Justice. Curiously, he waited until both President Donald Trump and Attorney General Bill Barr were out of town. Call me suspicious ... again.

Mueller’s sentence makes about as much sense as me declaring, “If I had assurance Mueller didn’t still beat his wife, I would have said that.”

Upon Mueller’s twaddle, the Democrats and their media toadies did somersaults.

After a two-month emotional break-up over Mueller’s ineptness, spending two-plus-years and $40 million, but failing to find evidence Trump colluded with Russia, they now were sweethearts again. Mueller had come back to their side, all was forgiven. Somewhere inside that speech evidently was direction for impeachment.

The front page of the Chicago Tribune blared, “Mueller: Probe did not clear Trump.”

The New York Times had a similar lead.

The Washington Post, Jeff Bezos’ personal blog, chirped, “Mueller’s remarks fuel impeachment calls.”

These types of headlines, which many people only read, ensures to spin facts away from reality. They used to call this spin yellow journalism.

The newspapers could just have easily said something like, “Mueller is confused about what to do about Trump,” or “Mueller plans retirement and not talk about Trump anymore.” But that doesn’t pander to leftists and swamp creatures. They need blood, or preferably, Trump’s impaled orange head.

Yes, the “impeachment” word was back.

Despite boss Nancy Pelosi saying otherwise, Jerry “Shaky” Nadler was beside himself, giddy with glee.

“President Trump is lying … impeachment is back on the table,” he bellowed.

Of course, Nadler didn’t explain what Trump was lying about. In Nadler-world, just having a Republican president is grounds for impeachment.

(Note — by Swamp decree, a few days later, the word “impeachment” was to be replaced by the phrase “Trump Criminal Investigation. This will be the phrase you will hear ad nauseum henceforth).

Not surprisingly, our Chicago-based U.S. Reps. jumped aboard the impeachment bandwagon.

Louis Farrakhan’s little buddy, Danny Davis, immediately called for impeachment, as did fellow collaborator Jesus “Chuy” Garcia, both of who happen to serve on committees investigating the president. (Consider the irony of former Chicago aldermen sitting in judgment of any other human being).

Rhode Island Rep. David Cicilline said, “The Constitution gives Congress the sole power to hold a president accountable for high crimes and misdemeanors.” There again, the gerrymandering-accused and failed former mayor of Providence didn’t mention what high crimes and misdemeanors Trump supposedly committed, but that’s not important in liberal-speak.

Is President Trump guilty of obstruction, as Mueller implied and most Democrats would like you to believe? Depends on what your definition of “is” is.

My thoughts are that he probably did try to stop or impede the farce he colluded with Russia, just as you would if you were accused erroneously of beating your wife. Or, as a Facebook meme of Clint Eastwood standing next to a noose saying, “While we recognize Trump didn’t steal any horses, he is obviously guilty of trying to resist being hanged for it.”

For those who do not care for my demeanor with my commentaries, remarking about “hateful rhetoric” or “myopic views” let me ask you folks something. What are the Democrats and some Republican RINOs (Republican In Name Only) doing to unite this country with their daily attempts to undo the election results from 2016? How’s that different from a coup?

Sixty-three million people voted for Trump, including 57 percent of the Electoral College. (For clarification, the Electoral College hinders California, New York and Chicago from controlling who is president). But since the day the man was elected, Democrats in Congress, Barack Obama judges and media sycophants have hounded or lied about him, as well as attempted to block Trump’s every move. Some have gone so far as absurdly requesting elimination of the Electoral College. While engaging in this buffoonery, they have done absolutely nothing for the benefit of the country, and we pay dearly for it.

Nobody yet has clearly explained what President Trump should be impeached for, and many “pro-impeachers” do not understand that even if Trump is impeached, it does not mean removal from office. If we do go through the circus of impeaching him, at considerable cost, more than likely he still will be your president.

So, let me ask my critics, what’s so broad-minded about those Democrats efforts? How are those efforts moving the country forward? I implore you, change my mind. Let the emails and letters to the editor fly.

(0) comments

Welcome to the discussion.

Please be civil. Don't threaten others. Don't make obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist, sexist or otherwise demeaning statements. Be respectful of others even if you disagree with them.
Please be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Please be proactive. Report abusive posts.
Please share updates or more information. We value your input and opinion.