Are We Seeing A Chink In The Armor?

A Very Wicked Witch

Washington Post congressional reporter Rachael Bade said, “She was clearly putting a positive spin on what a lot of Democrats have privately said was a failed strategy.”

Source: Washington Post’s Rachael Bade: Privately ‘A Lot of Democrats’ Said Pelosi Impeachment Gambit Was ‘Failed Strategy’

Now Bade is talking about Nancy Pants holding back the articles of impeachment, and it’s significant were starting to see this level talk about moderates questioning Nancy Pants, but when these people wake up and smell the coffee, they’ll come to realize The Impeachment™ is a failed strategy.

The entire rush to have impeachment hearings and a vote in the time and manner in which Nancy Pants and Adam Schitt orchestrated it (Quite possibly with willing help from the left wing news media I might add.), was meant to preempt the release of Michael Horowitz report and his testimony on the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.

Top story: TRUMP IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS!

Other stories: Horowitz reports widespread FISA abuse, largely vindicating Devin Nunes

Nancy Pants not sending the article to the Senate, under the same rules by which Bill Clinton was impeached, is a tacit admission by Nancy Pants that the democrats have nothing, and the impeachment would quickly die in the Senate.

Watch the video at the link, and you’ll probably get a real laugh too, when George Stephanopoulos, the left wing Shill that he is, had to rush in there to prop up Nancy Pants.

The fact is, democrats never hid which way they were going to vote when Clinton had his Senate trial, so spare me your crocodile tears about Cocaine Mitch. Ok, Georgie?

You fucking hack.

Over the coming months, as it becomes clearer and clearer what they democrats were up to over the past 5 years, the harder protecting democrats will become for the left wing media… but I suppose Glenn Greenwald will be satisfied.

Real Clear Investigations: CrowdStrikeOut: Mueller’s Own Report Undercuts Its Core Russia-Meddling Claims

Barr’s ongoing review, and Mueller’s pending appearance before Congress, offer fresh opportunities to re-examine the affair’s fundamental inconsistencies. Authorized by the president to declassify documents, Barr could shed light on the role that CrowdStrike and other sources played in informing Mueller and the Brennan-directed ICA’s claims of a Russian interference campaign. When he appears before lawmakers, Mueller will likely face questions on other matters: from Democrats, his decision to punt on obstruction; from Republicans, his decision to carry out a prolonged investigation of Trump-Russia collusion despite likely knowing quite early on that there was no such case to make.

If the U.S. government does not have a solid case to make against Russia, then the origins of Russiagate, and its subsequent predominance of U.S. political and media focus, are potentially even more suspect. Given that allegation’s importance, and Mueller’s own uncertainty and inconsistencies, the special counsel and his aides deserve scrutiny for making a “central allegation” that they have yet to substantiate.

Source: CrowdStrikeOut: Mueller’s Own Report Undercuts Its Core Russia-Meddling Claims | RealClearInvestigations

It’s a long read, but well worth your time.

The Washington Examiner: Jim Acosta recalls ‘quaint’ Mitt Romney gaffes, including one that wasn’t a ‘gaffe’ at all

Isn’t it funny how the democrat media complex will savage a republican and drum him off the stage, only to turn around and rehabilitate his or her image to contrast them with the current republican leadership?

For many voters on the Right (myself included), the “binders” moment served as further proof that it does not matter who the GOP submits as its presidential nominee. He can be as kind and decent as Romney, and Democrats and their allies in the press will still savage him as a retrograde monster, grinding him into dust with a relentless torrent of attacks and criticisms. And if Democrats and their supporters cannot find legitimate controversies with which to destroy the GOP nominee, they will simply concoct them from thin air, as they did with “binders full of women” and similar episodes of ginned up outrage. It makes sense, then, that Trump’s inability to feel shame, coupled with his love for fighting with journalists, appealed to the same people who watched in dismay in 2012 as their perfectly honorable candidate was torn to pieces by the White House and the press.

“Romney ran a hard-fought, respectable race,” Acosta recalls in his book, referring to the former governor as a “thoroughly decent human being” with “good manners.”

Is that so?

Because that most certainly was not the message voters received in 2012, back when Acosta and others were busy obsessing over supposed “gaaaaaaffes” committed by the man who threatened to deny their beloved Barack Obama a second term in office.

Source: Jim Acosta recalls ‘quaint’ Mitt Romney gaffes, including one that wasn’t a ‘gaffe’ at all