Schiff Shifts on Los Angeles DA

by Daveda Gruber:

The District Attorney of Los Angeles, Jackie Lacey, is seeking a third term in office and Representative Adam Schiff D-Calif., had endorsed her a year ago.

Things have apparently shifted in Schiff’s mind because a progressive challenger has emerged during this time when law enforcement is dealing with criticism.

Schiff tweeted this:

California Assembly-Member, Laura Friedman, tweeted this:

The first black female district attorney in Los Angeles history stated to news outlets that she is proud of her work against racism criminal justice reform.

Lacey told newspaper reporters, “As the first African-American woman to hold the LA County D.A.’s office, I am proud of my record of taking on systemic racism and reforming criminal justice — from bail reform, to reducing juvenile cases by nearly 50 percent, to increasing our office’s focus on mental health treatment instead of incarceration. I am singularly focused on doing the work of the people of LA County during this time of crisis.”

It has been reported that that the same day that Schiff made his announcement protestors congregated outside Lacey’s home.

The protestors urged Lacey to file charges against the police officers who fatally shot Alex Flores and Daniel Hernandez. The shooting occurred in separate incidents in 2019 and 2020.

It appears that it did not help matters when Lacy apologized for the incident that her husband, David Lacy, had allegedly pointed a gun at approximately fifty Black Lives Matter protestors who were on their property and threatened to shoot them.

See Lacey pointing gun here:

 

Russia Probe Interviews Cleared for Release

by Daveda Gruber:

The Democrat from California, Adam Schiff, who is the House Intelligence Committee Chairman, has been given the green light to publicly release the transcripts from the panel’s Russia probe.

Richard Grenell, who is the acting Director of National Intelligence, has given Schiff the clearance needed to give the documentation to Republicans who have been demanding access to the documents.

A letter from Grenell dated May 4th went out to Schiff informing him that transcripts of the entire fifty-three interviews related to foreign interference in the 2016 election, which have more than 6,000 pages in total, can be released.

Grenell said in the letter that there will be redactions.

In September of 2018, the committee voted to release the transcripts of witness interviews that they conducted during the panel’s Russia probe. The vote was unanimous and bipartisan.

The transcripts were sent out to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence for an interagency classification review in November of 2018. This was apparently done to prevent an unintended disclosure of classified information.

Forty-three of the fifty-three transcripts were reviewed and completed in June of 2019 according to Grenell.

According to FOX News Grenell wrote, “As of today, the interagency review of the remaining ten transcripts has been completed, as well.

He then added that “pursuant to your guidance, these transcripts have not been shared with the White House.”

Grenell also wrote, “In the interests of transparency and accountability, I urge you to honor your previous public statements, and your Committee’s unanimous vote on this matter, to release all 53 cleared transcripts to all Members of Congress and the American public as soon as possible.

He also wrote that he was “willing” to release the transcripts directly from ODNI “as to ensure we comply with the unanimous and bipartisan vote to release the transcripts.”

Grenell went on in his letter to say, “In the interests of transparency and accountability, I urge you to honor your previous public statements, and your Committee’s unanimous vote on this matter, to release all 53 cleared transcripts to all Members of Congress and the American public as soon as possible.”

He also said in the letter that he was “willing” to release the transcripts directly from ODNI “as to ensure we comply with the unanimous and bipartisan vote to release the transcripts.”

Schiff’s actions have not gone over well with House Republicans and they have accused him  of blocking the Russia probe transcripts. This week they demanded Schiff give them access to the interview transcripts.

The Republicans sent a letter calling for the public release of the transcripts. The letter was signed by the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee:

Representative Jim Jordan

Representative Mike Johnson

Representative Ken Buck

Representative James Sensenbrenner

Representative Chip Roy

Representative Michael Cloud

Representative James Comer

Representative Jody Hice

Representative Glenn Grothman

Representative Steve Chabot

Representative Matt Gaetz

Representative Andy Biggs

Representative Ben Cline

Representative Doug Collins

Representative Guy Reschenthaler

Representative Louie Gohmert

Representative Kelly Armstrong

Representative Paul Gosar

Representative Thomas Massie

Representative Greg Steube

Representative Bob Gibbs

Representative Clay Higgins

Representative Ralph Norman

Representative Carol Miller

Representative Fred Keller

Representative Tom McClintock

Representative Debbie Lesko.

Their letter stated, “We understand now that Chairman Schiff is blocking the release of these transcripts. This news, if accurate, is disturbing—especially in light of Chairman Schiff’s cries in 2019 for transparency regarding allegations that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia.”

The letter went on to say, “For nearly four years, prominent Democrat politicians and commentators alleged that President Trump colluded with Russia, with Chairman Schiff going so far as to say that he had ‘direct evidence’ of collusion. Now that these allegations have been disproven by several investigations, the American people deserve to have transparency about why public figures such as Chairman Schiff continue to promote such wild accusations.”

What Schiff will do with the transcripts now is your guess as well as everyone else’s. He may release the redacted version in whole or he may pick and choose which ones he wants to release but all eyes will be on him and his next course of action.

The fact that there is redacted information is disturbing. When can the public see the entire truth? Never?

The ball is in shifty Schiff’s court but I wouldn’t want to be in his shoes.

Do You Enjoy President Trump’s Humor?

by Daveda Gruber:

President Trump has been watching the Democrat 2020 candidates battle each other and a couple of things that have happened over this past week must have sparked his interest and even put a smile on his face.

Senator Bernie Sanders I-Vt., had a big win in Nevada and the close call in Iowa, where he came in second place, or maybe first place, because no one seems to want to disclose what really happened in Iowa, has the Democratic establishment in a frenzy.

What happens in Iowa, stays in Iowa? I thought that was Las Vegas, Nevada. I’d have to guess all these caucuses are starting to get confusing.

Sanders has his party claiming that he has some involvement with Russia and that President Vladimir Putin  would like to see Sanders win the nomination and the 2020 general election.

Sanders has denied any affiliation with Russians and in fact, made a comment of denial.

Sanders said, “I don’t care, frankly, who [Russian President Vladimir] Putin wants to be president. My message to Putin is clear: stay out of American elections, and as president I will make sure that you do.”

Personally, I don’t see Sanders getting the chance to be president so Putin must be having a good laugh about this.

Trump decided to give the opposing party some advice. After all, they seemed like they needed it.

It is quite obvious that President Trump has a pretty good sense of humor. His supporters enjoy his perky personality.

Trump tweeted this:

It appears that lawmakers on Capitol Hill and some people who are familiar with the subject have knowledge of alleged Russian attempts at influencing the 2020 election.

It has been alleged that during a House intelligence briefing, lawmakers learned that Russia wanted Trump to win.

Marc Short, chief of staff for Vice President Pence, sharply denied that intelligence pointed to Russia wanting Trump to win.

Reports are alleging that Representative Adam Schiff D-Calif., leaked this information.

Short said that news of Russian interference or preferences is the result of “selective” leaking from the House Intelligence Committee led by Schiff.

This information must have sparked something with Trump because he too accused Schiff of spreading disinformation.

Trump tweeted:

I don’t know about you but I find this to be comical and to me there’s nothing that strikes my funny bone more than a tweet from Trump when he’s in a humorous mood.

House Republicans Boycott Intel Hearing

by Daveda Gruber:

On Wednesday Republicans decided to finally not stand for Democrat biased agendas and they have boycotted a public hearing.

In a powerful move of rebellion Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee accused Chairman Adam Schiff of ignoring Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act abuse.

A Justice Department inspector general report disclosed substantial misconduct of FISA applications brought about the boycotting by the GOP of the House Intelligence Subcommittee on Strategic Technologies and Advance Research or STAR, as it is referred to, to refuse to attend the hearing.

Republicans did not attend and called it a “publicity” event.

It appears that Representatives Devin Nunes, R-Calif., ranking member of the committee and Chris Stewart, R-Utah, the ranking member of the subcommittee joined their Republican colleagues in collectively standing up to Adam Schiff, D-Calif., for not holding hearings on the FISA abuse.

Republicans claim that under Schiff’s chairmanship the House Intelligence Committee has strayed far from its mandate of overseeing the Intelligence Community.

They are saying that there have been months where there has been inadequate oversight and that numerous critical issues pertinent to the Committee’s jurisdiction were ignored.

DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz issued his FISA report on December 9th which identified seventeen serious shortcomings related to the conduct of the surveillance of former Trump campaign foreign policy aide Carter Page.

Republicans have argued that the committee is exclusively in the position to consider the serious legal and policy questions that arose from Horowitz’s report.

There is a letter, written by Nunes and Stewart stating their demands and was signed by Republican Representatives Michael Conaway, Michael Turner, Brad Wenstrup, Rick Crawford, Elise Stefanik, Will Hurd, and John Ratcliffe.

Until the committee gives priority to the important issues in the Horowitz report, Republican Members feel that they cannot support distractions from core responsibilities.

Horowitz had confirmed in his report that the FBI’s FISA applications to monitor Page heavily relied on the unverified Trump dossier and news reports rooted in dossier author Christopher Steele’s unverified research.

Still, under Schiff’s chairmanship these issues and errors have not been investigated although Schiff had acknowledged the misconduct at the time and stressed that bureau leadership was moving to implement the IG’s recommendations.

It has become evident that Democratic lawmakers are more interested in staying on their own agenda of investigating President Trump and his associates rather than dealing with more prevalent issues.

Laws have been broken by people in high positions in the FBI and DOJ and Democrats with Schiff at the helm are simply ignoring it.

I can always be reached on Twitter to discuss political views.

@DavedaGruber

Where’s Docs of 18th House Impeachment Inquiry Witness?

by Daveda Gruber:

It appears that we understand that the House had witnesses during the impeachment hearings. Lead manager Adam Schiff D-Ca., has brought up the seventeen witnesses quite a few times.

As a matter of fact, along with Schiff, other managers have brought up these seventeen witness who were interviewed during the House’s secret depositions.

Why is the eighteenth witness never brought up? Michael Atkinson, who is the intelligence community’s inspector general, has firsthand knowledge of the origins of the whistleblower complaint that led to the impeachment.

The members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence interviewed Atkinson under oath. Unfortunately, they are not allowed to give any information on that deposition.

Republicans wanted that information to be heard in the Senate trail but it was denied to them.

The information in the testimony was heard by Representative John Ratcliffe, R-Tx., and the transcript of the questioning is 179 pages long and Republicans demanded that it be put into evidence.

That did not happen. The idea was rejected by Schiff It is alleged that the briefing with Atkinson was not conducted with the other two committees involved in the impeachment investigation, which are the Foreign Affairs and Oversight and Reform committees, and for that reason it did not qualify as a deposition.

You can see why Schiff got the nickname “Shifty Schiff” as he was the one who did the questioning and deciding which committee heard or did not hear testimony.

Ratcliff calls the “Q and A” period a deposition or a transcribed interview. Whatever it is described as, I’d like to see it and so would the American people.

The information allegedly holds information that could exonerate President Trump of the crimes the House determined would impeach the president.

During one of the breaks in the trial, Senator Joni Ernst, R-Ia., said House Democrats should have submitted the transcript.

Ernst said, “We should be allowed to take a look at that, but again they have stated numerous times in their brief they had overwhelming evidence, it would be so clear to everyone, and I haven’t seen that yet.”

I believe more people should be aware of this witness and the Democrats’ need to hide what he said and that they felt so strongly not to divulge it because it was not going to help their case.

Somewhere in the basement of Congress allegedly lies possible exoneration documentation of a duly elected president but Schiff and his cohorts have them well hidden.

Every American should be disgusted over this cherry picking of witness and documents that get brought into evidence. I don’t feel badly at all that more witnesses were denied by a Senate vote.

Karma can be a bitch!

I can always be reached on Twitter. Please reach out to discuss your views with me but never tell me how or what to write. Thank you.

@DavedaGruber

Did President Trump Commit a Crime?

by Daveda Gruber:

Many of those who are watching or paying attention to the impeachment trial of President Donald J. Trump have formed some sort of opinion as to how all the research, time and money will come together and turn out in the end.

So far, we who have some intelligence have noticed the lack of first hand information given by witnesses. That seems to be clear.

The other thing we seemed to have noticed is repetition by the left, especially by Adam Schiff, D-Ca., the lead manager.

Unfortunately, the Democrats seemed to have carefully planned that the words or talking points that they wanted to be heard by the public, were heard at prime time hours.

The mainstream media do play a big role in putting information into people’s heads. People don’t have to understand what a TV is telling them, as long as they get the general drift of the information. If every time they look at the screen viewers are being told that President Trump did horrible things, they start to get brainwashed into thinking that he must have done something bad.

The charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, which are the charges that the House impeached Trump on in December have no fact and actually seem vague, to say the least.

There have been no impeachable offenses mentioned. There is no treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors to be found by sane and intelligent human beings.

I didn’t see criminal-like conduct being alleged except in outright lies made by Schiff. I did also see that there were at least four managers, who voted against military aid to Ukraine in the past, get themselves in a tizzy about Trump allegedly withholding military aid that was not, in fact, held back.

I saw managers show and read from the transcript of the now famous, Ukraine phone call but it was never referred to in its entirety ony select sections were read to the public at large out of context.

On Monday, we will start to hear the president’s defense team try to explain this whole mess. I started briefly on Saturday but TV rating are not good on Saturday afternoon and I’m relieved that the president’s team had that figured out.

After the defense finishes its response to the hours on end of testimony that truly has no actual substance, there will be voting.

The charges against the president will either be dismissed because of insufficient evidence or witnesses will be called.

It would take four Republican senators to join the Democratic minority voting  to seek witnesses. Republicans in general don’t want witnesses.

Honestly, if there is no case, you don’t call witnesses. But if there are witnesses, who would they be? Well that depends if the Democrats get their own way and after a hypothetical decision is reached to call witnesses, Democrats will want those who may help their case.

But then GOP leaders should want witnesses too, in that case, and if played right, this game of chess could abstractly be played to give better odds to one side over the other.

Which side will have the edge? We’ll all have to wait and see but from the short the Saturday preview, I did notice a professionalism from the right, mostly I noted Jay Sekulow’s demeanor as apposed to fair facts that were simply non-existent in the voices of Adman Schiff, Jerrold Nadler D-NY., et al.

This coming week should be interesting and possibly even gratifying. Let’s see how this chess game pays out.

I’m love to hear your opinions. You can always find me on Twitter.

@DavedaGruber

Meet Pelosi’s House Impeachment Managers

by Daveda Gruber:

On Wednesday Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi presented the members of the House who will serve as House mangers and will be the prosecutors against President Trump in the Senate impeachment trial.

The trial is expected to begin early next week and Pelosi D-Calif., had a few things to say.

Pelosi said,  “I am proud to present the managers who will bring the case which we have great confidence in impeaching the president for his removal. The emphasis is on litigators.”

House managers will be:

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y.

House Democratic Caucus Chairman Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y.

Rep. Jason Crow, D-Colo.

Val Demings, D-Fla.

Sylvia Garcia, D-Texas

Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif.

Schiff will be the lead manager. He led much of the impeachment committee.

Nadler’s  panel drafted the articles of impeachment.

Lofgren is no stranger to presidential impeachment proceedings, as a Judiciary Committee staffer, during former President Richard Nixon’s and former President Bill Clinton’s impeachment.

Pelosi tweeted this:

Pelosi insisted that the charges against the president will be a stain on his legacy, and reiterating that an “impeachment that will last forever.”

Pelosi said, “This is a very serious matter and we take it to heart in a really solemn way. It’s about the Constitution, it’s about the republic if we can keep it and [senators] shouldn’t be frivolous with the Constitution of the United States even though the president of the United States has.”

She then added, “The president is not above the law. He will be held accountable. He already has been held accountable. He has been impeached and you can never erase that.”

Here is a video of the televised announcement:

Trump must have been watching because he came back with a tweet:

Okay, I have a problems with the managers especially Schiff who is the lead manager. If the Senate, after going over all the articles of impeachment, decide to call witnesses, Schiff would be one of the witnesses that I’d like to hear from after all, he met the whistleblower, who we all know who he is, yes, it’s still Eric Ciaramella.

There are photos of Ciaramella with the Schiff family. Here is one:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Schiff is adamantly against calling Ciaramella as a witness and I’d like the American people to find out why.

Is Nancy Pelosi Getting Coal for Christmas?

by Daveda Gruber:

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi D-CA., cannot be celebrating Christmas in a cheerful way. After all, she is holding onto the articles of impeachment that were supposed to go to the Senate.

Pelosi has had some frustration with the press when asked about why she broke tradition and rules for the first time in the nation’s history and did not hand the articles of impeachment to the Senate.

She actually snapped at a reporter who asked her about why she didn’t give the articles to the Senate and said, “Any other questions because I’m not going to answer any more questions on this… I’m not going to go there anymore.”

Does Pelosi think she can extend her rule to the Senate as well as the House? Maybe she’s living in an alternate universe? That universe must have a nice collection of spirits, in particular, vodka.

She has explained that she wants to make sure that the trial in the Senate, which holds a Republican majority is fair.

Watching the impeachment hearings to investigate if impeachment had cause in the House of Representatives was painful for me. There was no fairness. But then, the House has a Democratic majority and Pelosi is their leader.

Pelosi has no constitutional authority to make demands on the Senate’s procedure. But, would she even understand that? The Founding Fathers must be rolling over in their graves after being referred to more during the past few weeks than in decades. Democratic lawmakers seem to believe that by evoking the Constitution, you make the public think that you are doing things in a lawful manner.

Unfortunately, Republicans are much more intelligent than Democrats give us credit for. We actually pay attention to politics and we’re very aware when we are being fooled or lied to by the mainstream media.

Our system of government was created to not let government get out of control with power.

The truth of the matter is that Madame Speaker is obsessed with power and she is mistaken if she believes that the House has any power over the Senate.

Maybe Pelosi would like to change the rules, but fortunately for us, she can’t.

In responses to criticism from across the aisle that questioned her motives, she  answered, “Frankly, I don’t care what the Republicans say.”

Needless to say, Pelosi has two comrades in her quest. Adam Schiff D-CA., and  D-NY., are Pelosi’s chief clowns. They have created an unfair and unjust atmosphere that is beyond what I ever could have fathomed could actually take place.

Democrats have claimed that President Trump presents an immediate threat to our country and its security. They maintain that the need to eject him from office is an urgent matter. They could not afford to wait until November when voters, through an election, will have the chance to decide the fate of the president.

Because of such an emergency, people were told that House Democrats did not have the time to subpoena the witnesses they thought would make their case. Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney and former National Security Advisor John Bolton were not subpoenaed because of the lack of time.

The urgency seems to have dwindled.

The White House did bar some of the president’s aides from testifying but Schiff and Nadler could have challenged in the courts if they wanted to. They declined to do so.

Maybe Pelosi sees that the articles she has a grip on are not worth the paper that they are written on. She needs more evidence and she could actually think that witnesses of her picking, could provide that.

Nancy seems to be stressed to the max. When you impeach a sitting President, in this case, President Trump, on flimsy charges that even their own constituents are bewildered about, it cannot have a happy ending.

She was asked not long ago whether she hated Trump, she didn’t respond well. Pelosi ranted about being raised a Catholic and that she doesn’t hate anyone. Really? Her hatred for Trump has been her driving force to impeach him.

Pelosi, in trying to act somber, wore black to announce the impeachment partisan vote results. Her black attire didn’t fool anyone, including me. I saw the smirk on her face.

But even with the looming of impeachment hanging over Trump’s head, his approval ratings have improved. In the 48 hours following the partisan vote, the Trump campaign collected more than $10 million and the Republican National Committee raised a record $20.6 million in November.

I believe that money talks and in this case it is the voters who are speaking with their wallets.

I must assume that the vodka will be flowing at the Pelosi household during the holidays. Drowning your sorrows in a bottle seems to be a rather popular sport for Pelosi.

It’s probable that Pelosi may get coal for Christmas.

No Quid Pro Quo – What’s the Latest Allegation?

by Daveda Gruber:

It’s interesting that I thought that the Democrats were allegedly trying to impeach the president of the United States because of a quid pro quo.

That really isn’t all truth. Democrats were allegedly trying to build a case on an inquiry into possible impeachment in regard to a quid pro quo.

Unfortunately, that is no longer true. The Democrats have changed the language on us.

Now it appears that the Democrats are inquiring about alleged bribery.

Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee recently conducted focus groups to determine which description sounds more damning to voters.

In the focus groups that were conducted in key House battlegrounds were asked about word usage. It was discussed and it appears that “bribery” is in first place as seemingly the most damming word to the public.

After the open testimony was over today with witness Former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, Adam “Shifty Schiff” added a new word as he spoke to press outside the chamber and talked about “witness intimidation” and “abuse of power.”

I guess those words, in the mind of Schiff, sound damming to average voters.

President Trump will not be impeached. You can take that to the bank.

The best outcome that Democrats are hoping for is making Trump unelectable in 2020. If they can accomplish this, they have won.

Who Knows Who the Whistleblower Is?

by Daveda Gruber:

A big question in the minds of many Americans is, who is the whistleblower? Adam Schiff D-Calif., seems to know so why doesn’t anyone else know?

Schiff  is currently Chairman of the United States House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

I may have stumbled on the answer to lot of questions concerning the whistleblower and it has been open for others to see.

Want to see? You’re curious as I was, so I’ll show you what I’ve come to know.

Sometimes the answer is in front of your nose and simply a click away. I’ll share information that, for all intents and purpose is on Twitter. Yes, tweets can tell a lot but you have to know who is tweeting and what they know.

Follow the tweets? Yes!

Greg Rubini has an awful lot of interesting things to read, yes, by way of tweets.

Open your eyes and feast on this! Follow the money; no, follow the tweets!

The pinned tweet on Rubini’s page is:

Now here’s more:

So now we know why the investigation went to Italy. Yes, William Barr and John Durham traveled to Italy for more information on the whistleblower.

Schiff claimed the whistleblower had received ‘death threats’ without divulging when the alleged threats were received. Could it be that he forgot the whistleblower was anonymous; if so, how could they have been threatened?

These tweets also contribute to this allegation.

The deep state is deeper and murkier than anyone ever thought. Information is difficult to find. Social media has become a way to get real news because there is an overwhelming amount of fake news that is fed to the American people.

Please note that pictures or images of Ciaramella are now unavailable on any search. I wonder why?

Well now, I’ve given you some interesting information. Now here’s the challenge. Do your own investigating and please report any new finding to me so I can report on it.

It is absolutely amazing what you find if you are really looking and we are not buying it!

Thank you for all the tweets that led me to this information!