Impeachment Theater Today: Leaked Bolton Book Claims Ukraine Military Aid Held Over Investigations

By William Teach January 27, 2020 – 7:44 am

It’s not like John Bolton might have an axe to grind after getting fired, and not like Trump was withholding all that military aid that Obama provided…oh, right, Obama sent blankets after Russia took part of Ukraine, and all the impeachment theater House managers voted against providing military aid to Ukraine

BREAKING: Bolton to Claim Trump Held Up Ukraine Military Aid Over Biden Investigations

John Bolton, President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser, will claim in his upcoming book that the president wanted to withhold military aid from Ukraine until officials in the country announced investigations into Joe Biden and his family, the New York Times reported Sunday.

The stunning revelation comes as Trump battles an impeachment trial in the Senate over his efforts to have an investigation into his political rival announced by Ukraine, and undermines a chief argument of Republicans that military aid was not conditioned on such an announcement.

Per the Times:

Mr. Bolton’s explosive account of the matter at the center of Mr. Trump’s impeachment trial, the third in American history, was included in drafts of a manuscript he has circulated in recent weeks to close associates. He also sent a draft to the White House for a standard review process for some current and former administration officials who write books.

…

Over dozens of pages, Mr. Bolton described how the Ukraine affair unfolded over several months until he departed the White House in September. He described not only the president’s private disparagement of Ukraine but also new details about senior cabinet officials who have publicly tried to sidestep involvement.

Even if true, Joe Biden admitted to demanding that Ukraine fire the prosecutor investigating Burisma or he’d withhold a billion dollars in aid. That’s rather corrupt, is it not? Let’s also not forget that Biden was part of a presidential administration that spied on a GOP candidate. That they went to a FISA court under false pretenses to get warrants to spy on Donald Trump, his campaign, and his associates. Might Trump have wanted some payback? This is politics. People need to get over the pig in the mud stuff that occurs.

Then you have Trump responding with multiple tweets

I NEVER told John Bolton that the aid to Ukraine was tied to investigations into Democrats, including the Bidens. In fact, he never complained about this at the time of his very public termination. If John Bolton said this, it was only to sell a book. With that being said, the transcripts of my calls with President Zelensky are all the proof that is needed, in addition to the fact that President Zelensky & the Foreign Minister of Ukraine said there was no pressure and no problems. Additionally, I met with President Zelensky at the United Nations (Democrats said I never met) and released the military aid to Ukraine without any conditions or investigations – and far ahead of schedule. I also allowed Ukraine to purchase Javelin anti-tank missiles. My Administration has done far more than the previous Administration.

Does Bolton have any concrete proof?

Read: Impeachment Theater Today: Leaked Bolton Book Claims Ukraine Military Aid Held Over Investigations »

Posted in Current Affairs, Donald Trump | 19 Comments | Trackback URL

We Need To Change The Definition Of Refugee In The Age Of ‘Climate Change’ Or Something

By William Teach January 26, 2020 – 4:17 pm

Climate cultist Bill Frelick thinks he’s on to something because a tiny increase in the world’s average temperature is an existential threat to humanity (unlike the Islamic extremists linked to the news outlet, Al Jazeera, he has the opinion piece in)

It is time to change the definition of refugee
Climate change is an existential threat to humanity and as such, should be included in legislation on asylum seeking.

Despite recent and increasing efforts by the United States and other governments to narrow their interpretations of the refugee definition and to shirk their protection responsibilities, the need to expand the grounds for asylum is becoming increasingly urgent as the consequences of climate change become more pronounced.

A desperate appeal for asylum by a family from a Pacific island may have far-reaching implications for protecting people forcibly displaced by the effects of climate change. It could cause countries around the world to reconsider their laws and policies concerning refugees.

The case involves the Teitiota family, who fled the island of Tarawa in the Republic of Kiribati in 2007 and sought asylum in New Zealand in 2013. Ms Teitiota told the New Zealand court that she feared for her children’s health and wellbeing, that crops and coconut trees on the island were dying. (snip)

That same year, the father of the family filed a complaint with the United Nations Human Rights Committee, an independent expert body that monitors government compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. He claimed that New Zealand had violated his right to life under the covenant because the sea level rise had shrunk habitable space in Kiribati, resulting in violent land disputes and environmental degradation.

On January 7, the Committee issued its views, finding the threats to life posed by rising sea levels and other effects of climate change necessitate a broadening of refugee law. “The obligation not to extradite, deport or otherwise transfer pursuant to article 6 of the Covenant,” the committee said, citing its provision on the right to life, “may be broader than the scope of non-refoulement under international refugee law, since it may also require the protection of aliens not entitled to refugee status.”

I mentioned this silliness not that long ago. Anyhow, after much bloviating, the ending

While there still may be room to argue whether life-threatening threats are imminent in particular cases, the Human Rights Committee has recognised that fundamental refugee-protection principles need to be broadened now.

This means not only that our common understanding of what it means to be a refugee needs to change, but also that the 173 countries that are party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights should ensure their asylum standards and procedures are adapted to protect all who face existential threats if returned to home countries that have become unlivable.

Of course, the point here is to force 1st world nations to take in 3rd world people who demand entrance, people who have little to no skills, don’t speak the language, will be wards of the state, and demand that the nations change to accommodate the “refugees,” all because those 1st World Nations “owe” it to these people. This is exactly like climate reparations. When countries give aid now, it’s generally with strings attached in some manner. Climate reparations are because 1st World nations owe the 3rd world ones for being successful, hence, no strings.

Read: We Need To Change The Definition Of Refugee In The Age Of ‘Climate Change’ Or Something »

Posted in Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach January 26, 2020 – 1:00 pm

…is a horrible parking place for evil fossil fueled vehicles, you might just be a Warmist

IAYS – ice cream

The blog of the day is Not A Lot Of People Know That, with a post on Prince Charles’ climahypocrite trip.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

By William Teach January 26, 2020 – 9:24 am

Happy Sunday! Another awesome day in America. The sun is shining, the geese kept quiet and let me sleep in (getting over a cold), and the Democrats are making sure Trump will be re-elected with their shenanigans. This pinup is by Valerie Barykin with a wee bit of help.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. Weasel Zippers notes that the House managers complaining about withholding Ukraine aid voted against aid to Ukraine
  2. Virtual Mirage says Happy Year Of The Rat
  3. This ain’t Hell… covers the new Space Force logo
  4. The Right Scoop notes an MSNBC host saying that Dems failed to prove their case
  5. The People’s Cube discusses old communism vs new communism (Sanders vs Warren)
  6. The Lid covers a retired Navy SEAL vs Colin Kaepernick
  7. The First Street Journal notes some Davos elites understanding that carbon taxes make the working class poorer
  8. The Daley Gator says that if Democrats are going to lie they shouldn’t tell easily debunkable ones
  9. Shot In The Dark explains why you need to hang onto your plumbing
  10. Powerline covers that new “fire her” tape
  11. Pacific Pundit discusses Dem Mazie Hironu admitting what impeachment theater is about
  12. neo-neocon says that the Dem Senators running for president should recuse themselves
  13. Newsbusters covers Steve Cortes destroying unhinged Never Trumper Rick Wilson
  14. Moonbattery has some bat soup
  15. And last, but not least, Legal Insurrection notes Stacey Abrams suddenly against re-litigating past elections

As always, the full set of pinups can be seen in the Patriotic Pinup category, or over at my Gallery page (nope, that’s gone, the newest Apache killed access, and the program hasn’t been upgraded since 2014). While we are on pinups, since it is that time of year, have you gotten your “Pinups for Vets” calendar yet? And don’t forget to check out what I declare to be our War on Women Rule 5 and linky luv posts and things that interest me.

Don’t forget to check out all the other great material all the linked blogs have!

Anyone else have a link or hotty-fest going on? Let me know so I can add you to the list. And do you have a favorite blog you can recommend be added to the feedreader?

Read: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup »

Posted in Patriotic Pinup | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Republican Josh Hawley Plans To Force Subpoena Votes For Witnesses That Will Enrage Democrats

By William Teach January 26, 2020 – 8:14 am

Democrats say they want witnesses, because they failed to do their job properly in forcing their ultra-partisan impeachment theater through the House too fast. They primarily called witnesses they thought would hurt Trump (and were surprised when they didn’t). So, now

Josh Hawley Plans to Force Subpoena Votes for Bidens, Schiff, ‘Whistleblower’

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) revealed Saturday he has drafted motions to subpoena former Vice President Joe Biden, his youngest son Hunter Biden, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA), and the so-called “whistleblower.”

Hawley will attempt to force a vote on the subpoenas if the Senate approves additional witnesses and documents as part of the upper chamber’s trial.

Politico reported:

Hawley would also seek communications among the whistleblower, Schiff and his staff, transcripts of Atkinson’s congressional testimony, communications between the House impeachment managers and Democratic presidential candidates as well as documents related to Biden’s drive to oust former Ukrainian prosecutor Viktor Shokin.

Senator Lindsay Graham is against bringing in Hunter, as it would extend the trial theater, and I agree, but, because we do not really need to hear from Hunter. We do need to hear from Joe. Show the video of him extorting Ukraine, saying aid would be withheld unless the prosecutor investigating Burisma was fired. He bragged about it. Make him explain it. Ask if Obama actually approved of it. Heck, let’s nicely ask Shokin to appear.

Most certainly bring in the whistleblower, as what they actually heard. What’s that? They never witnessed anything first hand? Huh. And Schiff, let’s hear about the communications with the whistleblower. Let’s hear from the people who suddenly changed whistleblower standards to include 3rd and 4th hand material a month before the whistleblower went public.

Democrats had their turn. Now the GOP has theirs.

Read: Republican Josh Hawley Plans To Force Subpoena Votes For Witnesses That Will Enrage Democrats »

Posted in Current Affairs, Democrats, Donald Trump, GOP | 12 Comments | Trackback URL

We’re Saved: Climate Cultist Play Tackles Blaming Boomers

By William Teach January 25, 2020 – 3:59 pm

Say, what’s the carbon footprint of this play? All the electricity needed, the props, all the Warmists taking fossil fueled vehicles to travel to see it?

Review: In ‘Earthquakes in London,’ climate change shakes a family to its core

The truths we hold to be self-evident revolve around personal liberty, but when it comes to the greater good — the survival of the planet, for example — other truths are less convenient. Navigating the moral tightrope between individual need and collective responsibility brings riveting seismic impact to Rogue Machine‘s production of the climate change drama “Earthquakes in London.”

British playwright Mike Bartlett’s remarkably prescient 2010 work explores the existential challenges posed by successive generations of greed, neglect and science denial, laying particular blame on boomers who knowingly traded their descendants’ futures for short-term gratification.

We don’t want kids to have short term gratification, right?

Flashbacks introduce us to the corruption of a brilliant young engineer who buried his alarming environmental research findings in exchange for funding from the rapidly expanding airline industry of the early 1970s. The bulk of the play concerns the present-day legacy of that original sin, as the three daughters of the now-embittered scientist (Ron Bottitta) deal with a looming climate crisis.

Sounds like a lot of fun, eh? But, then, Warmists are rather humorless scolds to start with.

Read: We’re Saved: Climate Cultist Play Tackles Blaming Boomers »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | Comments Off on We’re Saved: Climate Cultist Play Tackles Blaming Boomers | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach January 25, 2020 – 1:00 pm

…is a world turning to desert because Other People use natural gas for heating, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Bustednuckles, with a post on being 2nd Amendment criminals.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Hmm, Did A Traffic Camera Take A Photo Of Bigfoot?

By William Teach January 25, 2020 – 10:30 am

Interesting if true

The story notes this tweet

Many are wondering if it is a trick of the light, particularly since there are no footprints, and

Read More »

Read: Hmm, Did A Traffic Camera Take A Photo Of Bigfoot? »

Posted in Like, Gnarly, Dude | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Elizabeth Warren Demands Big Banks Turn Over Their ‘Climate Change’ Plans

By William Teach January 25, 2020 – 7:26 am

Under what authority is she doing this? She’s a federal Senator.

Warren asks banks to turn over plans to prepare for climate change

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) sent a series of letters to the nation’s largest banks Wednesday asking them to turn over their plans for how they will prepare for the financial risks of climate change.

“As climate change continues to affect our economy, it is critical to understand your bank’s adaptation and mitigation strategies,” Warren wrote.

Warren’s letter highlighted a number of financial risks that could stem from climate change, all part of a package of research from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.

Sea level rise and floods could impact the real estate market. Increasingly severe natural disasters could stress financial markets, particularly as displaced people move away from often-hit areas.

You mean natural risks that have always happened could cause issues? ZOMG!

The letter was sent to JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo, Bank of New York Mellon, Morgan Stanley and State Street.

Warren’s letter comes as environmentalists’ push for Wall Street to take action on climate change is gaining traction.

The letter, which asked for banks to respond by Feb. 7, won’t just document banks’ response to climate change, but also asks the financial institutions to go on the record on their support for a Warren bill that would require “bank stress tests” for various climate scenarios.

The tests would require banks to evaluate risk at 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming above pre-industrial levels, 2 degrees of warming, and one assuming a “business as usual” path.

If banks did not provide a satisfactory plan under each scenario, the Federal Reserve could block them from making loans.

Wait, wait, was that part about “asks the financial institutions to go on the record on their support for a Warren bill that would require “bank stress tests” for various climate scenarios.” And about the Fed blocking banks from making loans if they do not support Liz’s climate cult fantasies? Warmists have given me crap for around 15 years for saying this whole thing has nothing to do with science and everything to do with Progressive (nice Fascist) politics, and then Warmists like Liz keep proving that I’m right.

Hey, maybe we can put a windmill on every teepee.

(Photobucket sorta seems to be working, we’ll see if the photo lasts)

Read: Elizabeth Warren Demands Big Banks Turn Over Their ‘Climate Change’ Plans »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Democrats, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Irony: Democrats Wrap Their Impeachment Theater Arguments By Calling Trump A Dictator

By William Teach January 25, 2020 – 7:11 am

Let’s remember what Ted Cruz said: “If you have the facts, you bang the facts. If you have the law, you bang the law. If you don’t have either, you bang the table. Today, we’ve seen a whole lot of table banging.” How’s this for table banging? This is from the NY Times front page with their main bullet points

Democrats PRess Obstruction Case Against Trump
Days of Arguments Wrap Up With a Dire Warning
-House impeachment managers concluded their case against President Trump with an emphatic call for his removal. “He is a dictator,” Representative Jerry Nadler said.
-Republicans appeared unmoved — not just on the question of whether to acquit Mr. Trump, but on whether to compel witnesses and documents, too.

Wait, what was that dictator part?

[Schiff] and the six other managers prosecuting the president spent much of Friday tying up the facts of the second charge, obstruction of Congress, and arguing that Mr. Trump’s attempts to shut down a congressional inquiry into his actions toward Ukraine was unprecedented and undermined the very ability of the government to correct itself.

“He is a dictator,” said Representative Jerrold Nadler of New York. “This must not stand.”

If he was a dictator, there would be no impeachment theater. Schiff, Nadler, Pelosi, and the rest would have been rounded up long ago. Their would be no #NeverTrump movement, at least not an open one. The news would not be speaking out against him. He’d be passing rules with his pen and phone, right, avoiding the duly elected legislative branch, right? Na, even that doesn’t make a president a dictator.

We refer to this as theater. It’s becoming clearer and clearer that that is all it is. The Democrats are playing to their base and the unhinged #NeverTrumpers on the right. They want this stuff on the news, hoping to pick off some Trump voters for the general election. They don’t have to get them to vote Democrat, just to not vote Trump. They knew from the start this was going to fail, because they had no evidence. Hence, the obstruction of Congress and abuse of power, while failing to actually include the quid pro quo/bribery stuff that (supposedly) started this whole thing, based on 3rd and 4th hand hearsay. They knew that getting to 67 votes to boot Trump would be impossible. Now they go completely over the top, making it even more impossible. Here’s Excitable Adam Schiff

Mr. Schiff’s fiery final oration appeared to alienate the very Republicans he was trying to win over. When he referred to an anonymously sourced news report that Republican senators had been warned that their heads would be “on a pike” if they voted against Mr. Trump, several of them vigorously shook their heads and broke their sworn silence: “not true.”

As the Times points out in a separate article, this delighted the left and enraged the right. This almost guarantees that the squishes on the GOP side won’t vote to boot Trump. Democrats will then claim that the whole thing was rigged, that the GOP didn’t want to listen, that they don’t care. Think about Democrats saying that it is a conspiracy if Republicans don’t vote to boot Trump. Now it’s time for Mitch McConnell and Trump to turn this around on Democrats.

Read: Irony: Democrats Wrap Their Impeachment Theater Arguments By Calling Trump A Dictator »

Posted in Democrats, Unhinged Tools | 38 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove