The ongoing effort to take down President Donald John Trump has entered a somewhat decisive phase now that the impeachment circus has commenced. There is no need, at least as far as I see it, to discuss the simple fact that this effort began during the administration of then President Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro and has been continued by the mammoth network of American intelligence communities with the assistance of the current president’s own Cabinet and sub-Cabinet appointees and numerous career bureaucrats who believe that it is their duty to “supervise” a duly elected president whose policies meet with their disdainful disapproval.

How Trump Has Enabled Those Who Have Sought and Continue to Seek His Ruin

Before discussing the coup itself, which, as Andrew McCarthy opined recently is being undertaken not necessarily to remove President Donald John Trump but to weaken him politically, something that, it would appear, might not occur given how Captain Kangaroo's coup hearings are unfolding as his self-shaped narrative of impeachable conduct unravels before his very eyes, it should be noted yet again that Trump’s lack of preparedness to be president and his ignorance of the necessity of staffing a president’s political appointees who are the nominal, sometimes very, very nominal, superiors of the career apparatchiks in the administrative state have resulted in a White House staff is that unusually at odds with itself and that leaks like a sieve even from those are supposed to be his allies and not the plants put there by the intelligence community.

Although, I have noted this in the past on several occasions, it is necessary, as I see it, to do so yet again as readers can forget what they have read, especially with all the verbiage available in cyberspace with just the press of a finger on a hyperlink. Repetition is the mother of learning.

First, Donald John Trump knew nothing about the Constitution of the United States of America before his election on Tuesday, November 8, 2016. He still knows nothing about the Constitution of the United States of America. While I am a critic of the false principles underlying the Constitution, it is nonetheless true that it is the governing charter of the Federal government. One who aspires to be the chief executive of the United States of America ought to have some familiarity with the provisions of the document that outlines the responsibilities and powers of the Federal government, including the limitations upon the exercise of those powers. 

Mind you, Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro and all other statists of the false opposite of the naturalist “left” had contempt for the Constitution of the United States of America because he believed it to be an “outdated” document that had to be deconstructed of its actual meaning to provide for the alleged “needs” of “the people” in a “changed” world.

In other words, the former president and commander-in-chief of the coup against the current president believed in the sort of “living constitution” that can be manipulated by Federal judges and/or ignored by presidents and congresses who have the “needs” of “the people” in mind. This is nothing other than a secular version of the late Karol Josef Wojtyla/John Paul II’s “living tradition,” which was relabeled as the “hermeneutic of continuity” by Antipope Emeritus Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, that is nothing other than condemned Modernist precept of “dogmatic evolutionism.” Jorge Mario Bergoglio, of course, is just an open dogmatic evolutionist without any pretext.

President Donald John Trump is not a reader. He fashions himself a doer. He simply hath not the attention span to engage in the realm of ideas. He reacts to the world by pure viscera, and he may never realize that his visceral instincts, while correct on some occasions, can never be substituted for a clear-sighted understanding of First and Last Things, ignorance of which consigns any man, including the president, to becoming his own worst enemy over the time and also to becoming easy prey for those who make it appear as though they know the world better (another spoiler alert: military generals and intelligence officials) even though they, the “experts,” are equally clueless about First and Last Things.

Second, Donald John Trump was also ignorant of the actual complexity of the existence, no less the structure, of the Executive Office of the President, which is a massive behemoth consisting of 1,869 full-time employees. It was as president-elect that Trump remarked to the two-faced man who had tried to sabotage his election and was conspiring even at that time to undermine and cripple his presidency, Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro, that he, Trump, did not know how many people worked in the White House. Such ignorance was inexcusable and is directly responsible for much of the chaos in his presidency as the man with the gigantic combover of dyed hair was simply unprepared to staff the Executive Office of the President, which is why he “outsourced” much of the personnel selection process of the nogoodniks in the Republican National Committee who cared only about giving their friends cushy jobs and to try to “limit the damage,” as they continue to see it, that could be done if Trump actually did carry through with his threat to “drain the swamp.”

Third, Donald John Trump, as has been noted on this site several times before, was equally unprepared to name individuals to fill sub-Cabinet positions in the fifteen Cabinet departments of the Federal government. This is how he got saddled with holdovers from the Obama/Soetoro administration, including the nefarious Sally Yates, who served as Acting Attorney General of the United States of America while a New Yorker who is tougher than Trump, Charles H. Schumer, the Minority Leader of the United States Senate, slow-walked the nomination of United States Senator Jefferson Beauregard Sessions (R-Alabama) to serve as the Attorney General of the United States of America. Obviously, it should go without saying that Trump’s selection of Sessions was mistaken in the first place.

Fourth, Donald John Trump made a huge mistake by retaining the petty statist and vicious narcissist named James Brien Comey as the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (F.B.I.).  Comey should have been fired. Deputy Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Andrew McCabe, should have been fired. Even without all of the evidence that has been revealed in the past three years now concerning the corruption within the highest reaches of the F.B.I., the United States Department of Justice (D.O.J.), the Central Intelligence Agency (C.I.A.), the National Security Agency (N.S.A.) and the United States Department of State, Comey and McCabe should never have been retained.

Fifth, Donald John Trump made a “yuge” mistake, as they say in New York, by thinking that he could schmooze the retained Comey, whose new book confirms that he had contempt for Trump before his election and distrusted him after his inauguration. Trump has far, far too much confidence in his ability to win people over to his side, and it was when he saw that he could not “play” Comey, who has always been every bit the self-seeker, he chose a most inopportune to fire Comey, which played into the latter’s hand perfectly.  Comey wanted a “special counsel” appointed to investigate the nonexistent “collusion” of the Trump campaign with Russia, and he got exactly the man he wanted, deep state’s own Robert Mueller (see an editorial in The Boston Herald on Mueller’s prosecutorial misconduct in his current role as leader of another American coup, Investigators Reveal Bias Against Trump) and Real Clear Politics’ Carl Cannon’s Special Prosecutorial Abuse, when another ill-chosen appointee, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosentein, chose his former boss at the United States Department of Justice’s Public Integrity Section of the Criminal Division to conduct what has turned out to be an investigation whose scope is ever-widening. 

These were completely unforced errors. However, Donald John Trump is the epitome of the “carnal man,” which refers not only his notorious behavior as a serial adulterer in each of his three “marriages” but, much, much more importantly, his absolute obsession with himself and how he is viewed by others. There are more important things for a president to do than to be on something called “twitter” all day long as he responds to what the idiots in the chattering class are saying about it.

Trump also has caused numerous problems for himself by surrounding him with lowlifes such as the late Roy Cohn, the sodomite who mentored him never to admit that he had made mistakes and to attack others without any mercy or distinctions, the weaselly coward and financially crooked Michael Cohen and, of course, the amoral pro-abort named Roger Stone, the thrice married, thrice divorced serial adulterer named Rudolph William Giuliani, who became a pro-abort thirty years ago in order to receive the cross endorsement of the New York State Liberal Party (an endorsement that came with a twenty-five thousand dollar donation), who had absolutely no business being sent on any kind of investigation in Ukraine. There is an investigation to be undertaken in Ukraine, which is the ground zero of the deep state’s effort to thwart Trump's election and to cripple his presidency, but that is the purview of United States Attorney General William Barr and United States Attorney for the District of Connecticut John Durham, not of Rudolph William Giuliani. Trump's trust in Giuliani is similar to the trust that Madame Defarge (also known as Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton) placed in Sidney Blumenthal to run rogue "intelligence" operations for her whilst she was the United States Secretary of State from January 21, 2009, to February 1, 2013.

Similarly, despite the parade of the cast of characters that walked in and out of Trump Tower on Fifth Avenue in the Borough of Manhattan, City of New York, New York, President-elect Trump did not acquit himself well when he selected such men as James Mattis, Rex Tillerson and Jefferson Beauregard Sessions to serve in his Cabinet, and the selection of Reince Priebus to be his first White House Chief of Staff was disastrous. Also, the presence of his Kabbalist son-in-law, Jared Kushner, in the White House was ill-advised, to say the very least.

President Trump was also hamstrung by selected such warmongers as Herbert Raymond “Daddy Warlocks” McMaster and John Bolton, of all people, to serve as his National Security Advisers after his original selectee, Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, for whom Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro had an intense personal animus, was kneecapped as follows by the combined statist likes of Acting Attorney General Sally Yates, Federal Bureau of Investigation Director James Brien Comey, Deputy Federal Bureau of Investigation Director Andrew McCabe and Federal Bureau of Investigation Special Agent Peter Strzok:

Oddity No. 1: Then-FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe personally contacted Flynn on the second full working day of the Trump administration and asked him to meet with FBI agents, a meeting that McCabe reportedly characterized as no big deal. That should have been Flynn’s first red flag. The FBI doesn’t do “no big deal” interviews.  

McCabe’s request apparently came at the direction of his boss, former FBI Director James Comey, whose now-transparent camera lust led to the nugget last week that he wanted to exploit his perceived — and likely biased — view that the Trump administration would not be sophisticated enough to spot an end run around normal protocols and White House legal counsel.  

Was there anything legally wrong with Comey’s and McCabe’s duplicitous efforts to lull Flynn into a false sense of security, gain direct, solo access to him and not warn him about lying to agents? Nope. And that’s why his attorney’s probe of that angle went nowhere with the court.

But “legal” doesn’t mean it was proper. McCabe dispatched Peter Strzok and another agent to do the interview. Pause a moment: Comey, McCabe, Strzok. All three subsequently were fired for cause. Comey’s and Strzok’s strong anti-Trump biases, and McCabe’s conflicted links to the Clinton campaign, are well documented. It is fair to question their motivations for seeking out Flynn the way they did. Their actions were unprecedented for senior-most leadership of the FBI … yes, odd.   

And so Flynn, who now faces criminal sentencing for lying to FBI agents, was contacted by McCabe, who not only lied to FBI agents but did so, unlike Flynn, while under oath. McCabe remains uncharged. Words such as “odd” and “ironic” fail. (Three Oddities in in FBI Handling of Michael Flynn interview.)

For present purposes of this commentary, you see, James Brien Comey’s Machiavellian calculation about the unsophisticated nature of the chaotic Trump White House on the second day of its operation proved to be quite successful as it set the stage to cripple President Donald John Trump’s presidency by taking out his National Security Adviser. Moreover, Flynn, who had no reason to lie to FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok, about the meeting that he had on December 22, 2016, with Russian Ambassador to the United Nations to ask him to cast a veto on a United Nations resolution condemning the Zionist State of Israel for its continued building of Israeli settlements on the West Bank, found himself under questioning for doing what Jared Kushner wanted done: to protect his beloved State of Israel.  (Flynn-Kislyak Conversation on Israel.)

In other words, it was the desire to help the Zionists that was used by the DeepStateniks to go after Flynn and thus to use their own strategies to capitalize on Trump’s unpreparedness to govern and the misplaced trust that he put in James Brien Comey.

Similar unforced errors on the part of Donald John Trump continues to this day, including that unfortunate “tweet” of his on Friday, November 14, 2019, the Feast of Saint Josaphat as the witness he  sought to undermine, former American Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch

The Bick Stops Squarely At Obama/Soetoro’s Oval Office

The observations above are not meant in any way to detract from the simple truth that the effort to prevent Donald John Trump from being elected and then, failing that, to undermine his presidency with all manner of false accusations that are then dutifully reported as “real news” by the administrative/deep state’s operatives and stooges within the mainslime media began right in the Oval Office with the imperious Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro, who said of himself in 2008 that:

Change will not come if we wait for some other person or if we wait for some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for.

(APPLAUSE)

We are the change that we seek. We are the hope of those boys who have so little, who've been told that they cannot have what they dreamed, that they cannot be what they imagine.

Yes, they can. We are the hope of the father who goes to work before dawn and lies awake with doubt that tells him he cannot give his children the same opportunities that someone gave him.

Yes, he can.

We are the hope of the woman who hears that her city will not be rebuilt, that she cannot somehow claim the life that was swept away in a terrible storm.

Yes, she can.

We are the hope of the future, the answer to the cynics who tell us our house must stand divided, that we cannot come together, that we cannot remake this world as it should be. (Raw Data: Text of Barack Obama's Super Tuesday Speech.) 

Mind you, the now former President Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro still believes his own narcissistic rhetoric. He really does believe that he was the “one” we had been waiting for and that not no one was qualified to replace if he did not approve of his successor and was assured that he (or she, another “chosen one,” Madame Defarge) would continue his policies without any qualification. This is what the former self-anointed secular savior of the United States of America said Thursday, November 3, 2016, in an anti-Trump campaign speech in Raleigh, North Carolina:

I’ve got Republican friends who don't think or act the way Donald Trump does.  This is somebody who is uniquely unqualified.  I ran against John McCain.  I ran against Mitt Romney.  I thought I’d be a better President, but I never thought that the Republic was at risk if they were elected.  And guess what, North Carolina -- the good news is, all of you are uniquely qualified to make sure this guy who is uniquely unqualified does not become President.  You just got to vote.  You just got to vote.  (Applause.)  And the nice thing is, you don’t just have to vote against that guy because you’ve got a candidate who is actually worthy of your vote -- who is smart, and who is steady, and who is tested, is probably the most qualified person ever to run for this office, and that is the next President of the United States, Hillary Clinton.  (Applause.)  (Obama/Soetoro Speech, November 2, 2016.)

Whether not United States Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz, whose report on how the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation and Justice Department’s mishandling of the Hillary Clinton e-mail scandal permitted the malefactors to escape unpunished and criticized in the mildest manner possible, or the United States Attorney for the District of Connecticut, John Durham, ever state categorically that Obama/Soetoro was (and continues to be) the mastermind of the ongoing coup, it is no more believable that the nefarious duo of James Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence from August 9, 2010, to January 20, 2017 and John Brennan, the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency from March 8, 2013, to January 20, 2017, were acting as “roque agents” in the intelligence community than it was to believe that Lois Lerner was acting on her own when she headed the Exempt Organizations section of the United States Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to thwart the application of “conservative” organizations or that “rogue agents” in the IRS’s Cincinnati, Ohio, office were to blame. It is also implausible that the Deputy Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Andrew McCabe’s infamous “insurance policy” against then-candidate Donald John Trump that was heralded in “tweets” by FBI Special Agents Peter Strzok and Lisa Page was taken out without some level of White House approval, if not directly from Obama/Soetoro himself. No, no matter what the Horowitz report or Durham findings may state publicly, it is really inarguable that the impetus for the ongoing coup against Donald John Trump was not the brainchild of Barack Hussein “play by the book” Obama/Barry Soetoro.

The former Director of the Central Intelligence Agency John “I voted Communist Gus Hall, a stooge of the Communist Part of the Soviet Union, for president” Brennan was not acting on his own when he pushed the self-important, above-it-all, self-appointed philosopher king and gatekeeper, James Brien Comey, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation into establishing a false narrative that Trump campaign aides Carter Page and George Pappadapoulous were working in behalf of the government or Russian President Vladimir I. Putin. John Brennan worked for and at the direction of Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro, and though the proof may never be established directly, there is no doubt that the man who whose own “qualifications” for being president consistent of having served in the Illinois State Senate and for two years in the United States Senate before announcing his campaign for the 2008 Democratic Party presidential nomination, which he won narrowly over the carpetbagging expert in cattle futures named Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton, remains the mastermind behind the effort to prevent Trump’s election and then to thwart his presidency at every step of the way.

Indeed, Brennan’s role is at the center of United States Attorney John Durham’s investigation:

In the waning days of the Obama administration, the U.S. intelligence community produced a report saying Russian President Vladimir Putin had tried to swing the 2016 election to Donald Trump.

The January 2017 report, called an Intelligence Community Assessment, followed months of leaks to the media that had falsely suggested illicit ties between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin while also revealing that such contacts were the subject of a federal investigation. Its release cast a pall of suspicion over Trump just days before he took office, setting the tone for the unfounded allegations of conspiracy and treason that have engulfed his first term.

The ICA's blockbuster finding was presented to the public as the consensus view of the nation's intelligence community. As events have unfolded, however, it now seems apparent that the report was largely the work of one agency, the CIA, and overseen by one man, then-Director John Brennan, who closely directed its drafting and publication with a small group of hand-picked analysts.

Nearly three years later, as the public awaits answers from two Justice Department inquiries into the Trump-Russia probe’s origins, and as impeachment hearings catalyzed by a Brennan-hired anti-Trump CIA analyst unfold in Congress, it is clear that Brennan’s role in propagating the collusion narrative went far beyond his work on the ICA. A close review of facts that have slowly come to light reveals that he was a central architect and promoter of the conspiracy theory from its inception. The record shows that:

• Contrary to a general impression that the FBI launched the Trump-Russia conspiracy probe, Brennan pushed it to the bureau – breaking with CIA tradition by intruding into domestic politics: the 2016 presidential election. He also supplied suggestive but ultimately false information to counterintelligence investigators and other U.S. officials.
• Leveraging his close proximity to President Obama, Brennan sounded the alarm about alleged Russian interference to the White House, and was tasked with managing the U.S. intelligence community's response.
• While some FBI officials expressed skepticism about the Trump/Russia narrative as they hunted down investigative leads, Brennan stood out for insisting on its veracity.
• To substantiate his claims, Brennan relied on a Kremlin informant who was later found to be a mid-level official with limited access to Putin’s inner circle.
• Circumventing normal protocol for congressional briefings, Brennan supplied then-Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid with incendiary Trump-Russia innuendo that Reid amplified in a pair of public letters late in the election campaign.
• After Trump's unexpected victory, Brennan oversaw the hasty production of the tenuous Intelligence Community Assessment.
• Departing from his predecessors’ usual practice of staying above the political fray after leaving office, Brennan has worked as a prominent analyst for MSNBC, where he has used his authority as a former guardian of the nation’s top secrets to launch vitriolic attacks on a sitting president, accusing Trump of "treasonous" conduct.

Now Brennan is among the most vocal critics of the more comprehensive of the two Justice probes, the criminal investigation run by U.S. Attorney John Durham and Attorney General William Barr. "I don’t understand the predication of this worldwide effort to try to uncover dirt, real or imagined, that would discredit that investigation in 2016 into Russian interference," he recently said on MSNBC.

The Trump-Russia collusion theory was not propagated by a few rogue figures. Key Obama administration and intelligence officials laundered it through national security reporters who gave their explosive claims anonymous cover. Nevertheless, Brennan stands apart for the outsized role he played in generating and spreading the false narrative. (Brennan Was the Prime Mover of Russiagate.)

This is not all, however, as it was John “Get Out the Vote for Gus Hall” Brennan made sure that the alleged White House hearsay “whistleblower,” Eric Ciaramella, who is a protégé of one Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr. (see Alleged Whisteblower Erich Ciaramella Was Biden Guest at State Department Banquet), got to be his—and the administrative state’s—eyes  and ears at the nerve center of the Trump White House (see the very informative video: John Brennan Handpick Ciaramella for White House). Eric Ciaramella also accompanied the aforementioned Biden to Ukraine when the latter attempted to strongarm Ukrainian leaders into firing the prosecutor who was investigation why the Burisma company, which was co-owned by the inexperienced one-time drug addict named Hunter Biden, had received a contract from the Ukrainian government:

SEN. RAND PAUL: I think [alleged Ukraine whistleblower] Eric Ciaramella needs to be pulled in for testimony... he is a person of interest in the sense that he was at the Ukraine desk when Joe Biden was there and Hunter Biden was working for Ukrainian oligarchs. Simply for that, I think he is a material witness and needs to be brought in, the other question is, while the whistleblower is protected from being fired or from retaliation in court proceedings, the whistleblower is not protected from being asked who gave him the information, because we can't have a country where the private contents of the president's phone calls are leaked to people who are not supposed to be in that loop.

I think all these questions have to be asked. I don't think the whistleblower statute was never intended to have criminal trials and people put before the penalty of criminal justice without being able to hear from their accusers. So I think ultimately, he should testify. Adam Schiff is going to prevent it in the House. In the Senate, I will be advocating that if it comes to the Senate, we haven't had a vote yet of what the rules should be. By a simple minority, we should make the rules that the president is allowed to call all his witnesses, and then it is up to the president who he wants to call as his witnesses. (Rand Paul Says Ukraine "Whistleblower" is a Material Fact Witness and Must Testify.)

Ciaramella, it would appear, played a key role in the Obama/Biden White House of trying to “neutralize” Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort, meaning that the so-called “whistleblower” (whose very appellation as such is inaccurate as the president of the United States of America is not subject to the jurisdiction and oversight of the intelligence community), meaning that the thirty year-old former “student activist” from Yale is no “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington”:

More information is coming to light regarding CIA analyst and alleged whistleblower Eric Ciaramella. A new report from Judicial Watch revealed Obama-era visitor logs from the White House, which showed Ciaramella’s contacts during his tenure in D.C.

In their recent analysis of the visitor logs, the nonprofit examined his ties to Alexandra Chalupa, a contractor hired by the DNC during the 2016 election. She reportedly coordinated with Ukraine to investigate President Trump and his former campaign manager Paul Manafort. The logs showed Chalupa visited the White House 27 times and that her point of contact was Ciaramella. Judicial Watch released a detailed list of several other questionable figures who visited the presidential mansion.

Daria Kaleniuk is the co-founder of the Soros-funded Anti-corruption Action Centre (ANTAC) in Ukraine and visited the White House on December 9, 2015.

Former adviser Rachel Goldbrenner visited on both January 15 and August 8, 2016. During the time of her visit, Goldbrenner served as an adviser to former UN Ambassador Samantha Power, who was behind the unmasking of Mike Flynn.

Former European Assistant Secretary Victoria Nuland also met with Ciaramella and reportedly was involved in the Clinton-funded dossier. She visited on June 17, 2016. Judicial Watch has released documents revealing that Nuland was involved in the Obama State Department’s “urgent” gathering of classified Russia investigation information, which was disseminated to members of Congress within hours of then-candidate Trump taking office.

ANTAC Director Artem Sytnyk visited on January 19, 2016. He is tied to the release of documents during the 2016 campaign that were detrimental to former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort. Sytnyk was convicted in Ukraine — along with Serhiy Leshenkco — for releasing official documents about Manafort to interfere with the 2016 election.

Judicial Watch is calling on Congress to question Ciaramella about these meetings. (Judicial Watch Unearths Visitor Logs from Eric Ciaramella's Time at the White House.)

Even the Obama White House knew that Hunter Biden’s connections to Burisma were problematic, but the don from Chicago by way of Hawaii wanted to protect his vice president, which is why Ciaramella became a “whistleblower” in the first place:

Of all the supposedly shocking revelations that have emerged from the impeachment hearings this week, here’s one that the Democrats in Congress hope you don’t hear about: The Obama White House knew that Hunter Biden’s extremely lucrative appointment to the board of the Ukrainian gas company Burisma, which occurred the month after his father was named the administration’s “point person” on Ukraine, reeked of corruption — and they didn’t do anything about it.

In Congressional testimony Friday, former Ukraine ambassador Marie Yovanovitch confirmed for Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY), that in 2016 the Obama State Department privately ran her through a series of practice questions and answers to prepare Yovanovitch for her Senate confirmation hearing.

Stefanik confirmed that one specific question Yovanovitch was asked to prepare for was, “What can you tell us about Hunter Biden’s being named to the board of Burisma?” Incredibly, Yovanovitch later testified that the State Department told her to deflect any questions she might get about Hunter Biden and Burisma by referring Senators’ questions to the vice president’s office.

This admission regarding her senate confirmation prep session was startling, and it flatly contradicted a prior statement Yovanovitch had made in the hearing: “Although I have met former vice president several times over the course of our many years in government service, neither he nor the previous administration ever raised the issue of either Burisma or Hunter Biden with me.” (Obama Administration Knew Hunter Biden was Shady, Witness Admits.)

When all is said and done, despite Obam/Soetoro’s fear that a President Donald John Trump would overturn ObamaDeathCare, end the globalist policy of “open borders” and reorient American foreign policy according to this country’s legitimate security interests, it is my belief that the principal reason that the former president was so intent on preventing Donald John Trump’s election and then thwarting his presidency thereafter was the latter’s prominent public role in raising questions about the forty-fourth president’s country of birth. Without discounting the fact that the fascistic Obama/Soetoro and the rest of his Jacobin/Bolsehvik adherents of the farthest reaches of the false opposite of the naturalist left do not believe that anyone other than they are qualified or even have the right to hold public office, it is my belief that the Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro’s visceral hatred for Trump originated with the “birther controversy.” Although Donald John Trump has a pretty thin-skin when it comes to criticism, he is a completely rank amateur in the thin-skinned department in comparison to the prima donna Obama/Soetoro, who was ever ready to use the “race card” to stifle opposition, a ploy that worked more times than not.

There is no need to address the specifics of the ongoing coup’s end game, impeachment, being led at present by the shameless congenital liar named United States Representative Adam Schiff (D-People’s Republic of California) except to note that the administrative/deep state operatives who have been hard at work for well over three years now in multiple Federal agencies and departments believe that they, not elected officials, set the policy agenda for the government of the United States of America and that anyone who dissents from that agenda must be disobeyed and then accused of betraying what they think are the “best interests of the nation.” It is beyond question now that the career bureaucrats, including those in the intelligence communities, and the foreign service, several of whose self-righteous, preening and posturing creatures have been in the public spotlight this past week, believe that elected officials are so much window-dressing that gives them cover to govern as they “know” is best for us unwashed masses.

Journalist Sharyl Atkisson made this observation in a different manner:

Under the U.S. Constitution, it is the president of the United States who determines foreign policy. How can President Trump be “at odds with foreign policy” when he’s the one who determines it?

President Trump may well have been altering foreign policy on Ukraine. It should be of no surprise that he wasn’t operating “business as usual,” since he ran on that platform and has executed it from day one. It’s clear that Kent and Taylor didn’t like or agree with Trump’s ideas, and believe they know what’s best. Trump rankled, contradicted and “embarrassed” them by operating outside the “regular” chain.

But they seem to miss the fact that their desires are subordinate to the president’s. “Official foreign policy,” as they called it, is not an independent unmovable-force object that exists outside the president’s authority; it is what the president determines it to be. The diplomats must execute the president’s wishes or resign from their posts if they feel they cannot bring themselves to do so.

Kent and Taylor genuinely seem to believe Trump was acting for his own political benefit — though they acknowledged they never had spoken to him or met him. Obviously, President Trump would say he was acting in the national interest. But their testimony makes it pretty clear why President Trump would develop a communications chain that would attempt to minimize career diplomats who do not wish to execute his wishes and may be working to undermine them.

Trump’s enemies may cheer on the idea of diplomats and other officials choosing to oppose or undermine his wishes. But based on our Constitution, the dissenting diplomats are the ones who are at odds with “official foreign policy”— not the other way around. To the extent they are attempting to further policies that oppose or undermine the president’s wishes, they are the ones conducting the “shadow campaign.” (The President, Not Diplomats, Sets 'Official Foreign Policy'. See also What impeachment is really all about.)

Even though President Donald John Trump was ill-advised mention in his July 25, 2019, phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, regardless of any nonexistent threat to withhold American military assistance even if that assistance was delayed for a time, something several of the unusually taciturn Vice Preisdent Michael Richard Pence’s aides were concerned might cause a political problem, the previous administration, that under Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro and Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., constantly threatened predominantly Catholic and/or Mohammedan nations to change their laws that defended the inviolability of the preborn child and criminalized sodomite behavior:

Last month, the eyes of the world were on Africa as President Obama welcomed Nigerian president Muhammadu Buhari to the White House and, for the first time as president, visited his father's home country of Kenya.
 
Reports indicate that Buhari and U.S. President Barack Obama discussed the Islamic terrorist group Boko Haram, as well as possible political and economic reforms for Buhari's struggling country. Similar discussions took place in Kenya.
 
While all seemed well on the public front, the reality is that both Buhari's and Obama's visits were used by the White House to promote what Pope Francis called "ideological colonization." This agenda was let slip just days before Buhari arrived in Washington, when the U.S. State Department indicated it would push the Nigerian government to redefine marriage.

According to the Nigerian Pilot, America's Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, told reporters that "[a]s a policy, we will continue to press the government of Nigeria, as well as other governments which have provided legislation that discriminates against the LGBT community."

Thomas-Greenfield defended the pressure, saying it was not international interference in Nigeria's domestic affairs, but rather is "very much a work in progress...I think you will agree with me that the law in Nigeria really went far in discriminating against this community but also people who associate with them. So, we will continue to press the government, to press the legislature to change these laws and provide human rights for all Nigerian people regardless of their sexual orientation."
 
Across Africa, millions of people face starvation, war, oppression, poverty, and death due to a lack of basic aid. For decades, the United States has provided myriad forms of aid designed to help nations surpass these problems.
 
Under the Obama administration, however, humanitarian aid has often come with a price tag: Abandoning traditional values, especially those related to contraception, abortion, and marriage.
 
In 2011, Obama issued a memorandum that directed all U.S. embassies worldwide to promote LGBT rights, which he said were "central to the United States commitment to promoting human rights."
 
"Under my Administration, agencies engaged abroad have already begun taking action to promote the fundamental human rights of LGBT persons everywhere," he said.
 
That same year, the administration made aid to Nigeria dependent upon its not enacting the Same Sex Marriage Prohibition Act. And before she stepped down as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton compared same-sex relationships to race and sex in a speech that left African leaders furious.
 
Last year, at the U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit in Washington, Obama and Vice President Joe Biden both suggested that Africa's war-torn, impoverished nations could attract economic and development aid from the West by becoming more gay-friendly.
 
This is social engineering at its finest, but it is not limited to redefining marriage. Contraception and abortion policies -- euphemized as "family planning" -- are also pushed upon Nigeria, whose citizens have rejected these mandates, which they consider harmful anti-women policies.
 
Again, this "ideological colonization" is not limited to Nigeria. During his visit to Kenya, Obama publicly lectured president Uhuru Kenyatta on his nation's laws against same-sex sexual relationships. According to CNN, sexual relationships between males over 14 is illegal, and punishable by as many as 14 years in prison.
 
This is the same administration that has spent substantial political capital on a deal with Iran that includes scant reforms in that dictatorial, terrorist-supporting nation, and opened relations with Cuba despite requiring few, if any, political reforms from the Castro dictatorship.
 
African leaders have long opposed Obama's 21st-century imperialism, especially religious leaders. In October, Ignatius Kaigama, the Archbishop of Jos in Nigeria - whose diocese is in the heart of the area affected by terrorist organization Boko Haram - and Bishop Joseph Osei-Bonsu of Ghana told me that they were tired of international pressure to legalize gay marriage.
 
The Nigerian prelate explained, "Marriage is between a man and a woman... even outside of scriptural support, our culture tells us that, nature tells us that."
 
And despite threats of denial of much-needed aid, he says, Africans will not capitulate to the demands. "These are our cultures, and we're not going to compromise over them."
 
Former Population Research Institute Media and Research Coordinator Anne Morse, who is beginning a doctoral program on population studies, was recently in Kenya. An observation she made on Facebook is instructive:
 
"Dear President Obama," wrote Morse, "[please] justify why--for every dollar USAID spends on water and sanitation in Kenya--it spends TWELVE dollars on family planning." Morse noted that she "[had] seen 4 advertisements for condoms today, but hasn't had a hot shower since Sunday."
 
The worst example of America's new-age imperialism is found in the growing evidence that President Obama purposely withheld aid to fight the terrorist group Boko Haram. While Buhari's predecessor has been accused of refusing U.S. aid to fight Boko Haram, what has been less reported is that the refusal came in part because the United States demanded Nigeria change its laws on marriage.
 
These accusations aren't just coming from Catholic bishops. A former U.S. Congressman, a Pentagon Army spokesperson, a Nigerian official, and the Nigerian Ambassador to the United States have all confirmed this is the case. To quote Ambassador Adebowale Adefuye in his statement to the Council on Foreign Relations, "the U.S. government has up till today refused to grant Nigeria's request to purchase lethal equipment that would have brought down the terrorists within a short time."
 
Nigerian-American Winnie Obike, a Ph.D. candidate in political communications at the University of Maryland, told me that she is "appalled by the Obama administration's foreign policy objectives for the African continent."
 
"It is ironic that a president who has passionately apologized for America's 19th and 20th century imperialism has adopted a twenty-first century imperialism toward Africa by forcing nations to change their beliefs on marriage, abortion and contraception in exchange for basic humanitarian aid," said Obike, who was the Minority Outreach Coordinator for the Minnesota for Marriage Campaign.
 
"Nigeria and other African nations need humanitarian aid and help fighting terrorist groups like Boko Haram, not the West's declining values," said Obike. "I urge President Buhari not to compromise traditional values in exchange for foreign aid."
  
In 2009, President Obama was given a Nobel Peace Prize because many hoped he would lead the world to greater peace and security. With less than 18 months left in his time in office, he can finally earn the award by setting aside his own ideology and focusing on the real aid needed by Nigerians, Kenyans, and many other Africans. (Obama's Twenty-first Century Imperialism on Display in Africa.)

How was this not impeachable and Trump’s putative threat to withhold military assistance to Ukraine that was granted after a delay of five weeks considered impeachable?

Well, there is intimidation and then, I suppose, there is intimidation.

A complete farce.

Moreover, what business does the government of the United States of American even have in Ukraine that justifies the sending of American military equipment and technology?

It is not an accident that many of the self-important military figures have testified before United States Representative Adam “Captain Kangaroo” Schiff’s House Intelligence Committee as these war hawks believe in endless war, and it does not matter to them that civilian control of the military is vested by Article II in the President of the United States of America. It is the president, not military officers nor career foreign service officers who establish American military and foreign policy.

President Dwight David Eisenhower was a globalist in his own right who had the blood of countless numbers of Catholics from Eastern Europe who were forcibly “repatriated” to the countries, then under the yoke of Soviet domination, were executed as “traitors” once they had been returned (“Operation Keelhaul”). Nevertheless, though, Eisenhower, a graduate of the United States Military Academy in West Point, New York, and a career military office, understood the dangers posed by the military-industrial complex, some of whose contemporary products deem it to be an act of “commitment to the truth” to cooperate in the takedown of their Commander-in Chief, which he expressed as follows in his Farewell Address to the Nation on January 17, 1961:

Crises there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small,there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. A huge increase in newer elements of our defense; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research-these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we wish to travel.

But each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs-balance between the private and the public economy, balance between cost and hoped for advantage-balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable; balance between our essential requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual; balance between action of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress; lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration.

The record of many decades stands as proof that our people and their government have, in the main, understood these truths and have responded to them well, in the face of stress and threat. But threats, new in kind or degree, constantly arise. I mention two only.

A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.

Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peace time, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.

Until the la