December 2019
« Nov    
PAYPAL Donations

< If you don’t stand behind our troops, why don’t you stand in front of them.

Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.

Proud to be an American.

Salute a Veteran!

Please consider a monthly donation; Click on the PayPal Button to contribute with PayPal

Donating by PayPal is Safe and Convenient

Send Checks to: The Highlands Tea Party 4196 Smoke signal Sebring, FL 33872

All donations are greatly appreciated, Thank You & God Bless

Donations are not tax-deductible.

My God! How little do my countrymen know what precious blessings they are in possession of, and which no other people on earth enjoy! ~Thomas Jefferson P>

General information

Archive for December 2nd, 2019

Dems Have No Evidence On President Trump, No Crimes Committed

Home  Nation

Republican Impeachment Report: Dems
Have No Evidence On President Trump,
No Crimes Committed

Top Republican lawmakers finalized a report Monday exonerating President Donald Trump from any wrongdoing regarding Ukraine just as Democrats with the House Judiciary Committee prepare to launch their own impeachment inquiry into the president, according to a report reviewed by
Ranking Chairman Devin Nunes, with the House Intelligence Committee; Rep. Jim Jordan, ranking member and Ranking member of the House Oversight Committee and Rep. Michael McCaul, ranking member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs issued the report. It noted that the impeachment inquiry is nothing more than the Democrats ‘orchestrated campaign to upend our political system.”
President Trump departed Washington D.C. Monday to a NATO gathering in London and before he left he criticized House Democrats for moving forward with impeachment proceedings. The House Judiciary Committee is planning to hold its first hearing on impeachment Wednesday. Trump’s lawyers declined the invitation from Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler to testify.
Nunes, Jordan and McCaul, noted in the report that despite all the legitimate concerns the President had regarding Ukraine corruption and the Bidens, there was absolutely no evidence presented during the hearings suggesting that Trump intended to withhold aid unless the Ukrainians investigated the situation.
“The evidence does not support the accusation that President Trump pressured President Zelensky to initiate investigations for the purpose of benefiting the President in the 2020 election,” the 110 page report states. “The evidence does not support the accusation that President Trump covered up the summary of his phone conversation with President Zelensky. The evidence does not support the accusation that President Trump obstructed the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry.”
“The unfortunate collateral damage of the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry is the harm done to bilateral U.S.-Ukraine relations, the fulfillment of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s desire to sow discoed within the United States, and the opportunity costs to the American people,” the report states.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-CA, was seeking to build a case against Trump, suggesting there was a ‘quid pro quo’ to withhold military aid from Ukraine unless the Ukrainian government investigated former Vice President Joe Biden’s son for his dealings with an alleged corrupt Ukrainian gas company. However, Schiff’s committee failed to prove Trump had taken action to withhold military aid from Ukraine. The Democrats attempted to pin what they hoped would be an impeachable crime on a phone call between Trump and President Volodymyr Zelensky. Schiff’s witnesses lacked any evidence that would suggest Trump asked Zelensky to investigate Biden’s son Hunter Biden. Hunter Biden was a paid board member of Ukrainian energy giant Burisma Holdings. His role in the company from 2014 through the Fall of 2015, has come under scrutiny. During the time, his father was charged with handling Ukraine and Hunter Biden’s firm Rosemont Seneca Partners LLC, “received regular transfers into one of its accounts — usually more than $166,000 a month — from Burisma from spring 2014 through fall 2015, during a period when Vice President Biden was the main U.S. official dealing with Ukraine and its tense relations with Russia,” as reported by John Solomon at The Hill.
The Republican report specifically notes the call summary provided by the White House of Trump’s conversation with Zelensky on July 25. The call, which was listened to by a number of witnesses who testified at the hearings, did not reveal any of the Democrats accusations of “quid pro quo” with regard to withholding military aid.
Further, Democrats assertions that Trump was asking Zelensky to investigate political rival Biden, are disputed by Republicans. They note the Democrats use of Trump’s phrase during the conversation “I would like you to do us a favor thought–” to present the appearance that Trump was pressuring Zelensky.
Republicans state that Democrats omit the latter part of the sentence saying the “full sentence shows that President Trump was not asking Zelensky to investigate his political rival, but rather asking him to assist in ‘getting to the bottom’ of potential Ukrainian involvement in the 2016 election.
“The reading is supported by President Trump’s subsequent reference to Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who had testified the day before about his findings, and to Attorney General William Barr, who had initiated an official inquiry into the origins of the U.S. government’s 2016 Russia investigation.
In fact, Zelensky, has repeated publicly that he felt no pressure to investigate Trump’s rival, Biden by the White House.
Zelensky responded to reporters during the 74th U.N. General Assembly saying “I think you read everything.” He was speaking of the transcripts of the phone conversation released by the White House.
“So I think you can read text,” he said. “I’m sorry, but I don’t want to be involved to Democratic, open elections — elections of USA. No, you heard that we had, I think, good phone call. It was normal. We spoke about many things. An I — so I think, and you read it, that nobody pushed — pushed me.”
The detailed report’s findings:
  • President Trump has a deep seated, genuine and reasonable skepticism of Ukraine our to its history of pervasive corruption
  • President Trump has a long-held skepticism of U.S. foreign assistance and believes Europe should pay its fair share for mutual defense
  • President Trump’s concerns about Hunter Biden’s role on Burisma’s board are valid. The Obama State Department noted concerns about Hunter Biden’s relationship with Burisma in 2015 and 2016
  • There is indisputable evidence that senior Ukrainian government official opposed President Trump’s candidacy in the 2016 election and did so publicly. It has been publicly reported that a Democratic National Committee operative worked with Ukrainian officials, including the Ukrainian Embassy, to dig up dirt on then-candidate Trump.
  • The evidence does not establish that President Trump pressured Ukraine to investigate Burisma Holdings, Vice President Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, or Ukrainian influence in the 2016 election.
  • The evidence does not support that President Trump withheld U.S. Security assistance to Ukraine for the purpose of pressuring Ukraine to investigate Burisma Holdings, Vice President Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, or Ukrainian influence in the 2016 election.
  • The evidence does not support that President Trump covered up the substance of his telephone conversation with President Zelensky by restricting access to the call summary.
  • President Trump’s assertion of longstanding claims of executive privilege is a legitimate response to an unfair, abusive, and partisan process, and does not constitute obstruction of a legitimate impeachment inquiry.


Black American support for President Trump is on the a rapid rise.

Three new polls: Trump’s approval rating among black voters has quadrupled

blacks for trumpTrump’s approval rating among black voters has quadrupled since 2016, according to three new polls. Rasmussen, Emerson and Marist polls have the president above a 33% approval rating among this key demographic. (screenshot)
Trump’s approval rating among black voters has quadrupled since 2016, according to three new polls. Rasmussen, Emerson and Marist polls have the president above a 33% approval rating among this key demographic. (screenshot)
Three new polls indicate that President Trump’s approval rating among black voters has quadrupled since 2016. Emerson and Rasmussen have Trump polling at 34%, while the Marist poll shows Trump enjoying a 33% approval among black voters.
This is significant because President Trump won the electoral college in a landslide in 2016 despite scoring just 8% approval from black voters.  If Trump can get even half the figure among black voters that he’s getting now in these polls, he will easily win reelection in 2020.


New Polls: Black American support for President Trump:

Republican strategist Deneen Borelli tweeted: “Rasmussen Poll tracking poll finds Donald Trump’s
total black approval at 34%. Democrats’ worst nightmare. Boom.”
View image on Twitter
View image on Twitter
 While polls are not always accurate (think back to all the polls that breathlessly claimed that Hillary Clinton would crush Trump in a landslide), there are other indications that black voter support for President Trump is climbing.
As BizPac Review reported, unemployment in the United States is at a record low. Notably, black unemployment has tumbled to a record low under the Trump administration — fueled, in part, by plunging unemployment among black women.
“If only half of that 34% of blacks vote for Trump, it will devastate the Democrats’ candidate,” the American Thinker observed. “Democrat victories in this evenly divided nation depend on both high black turnout and high black support. Hillary Clinton’s failure to drive both elements of black support to the levels Barack Obama enjoyed was a major cause of her defeat.”
Not surprisingly, Never-Trumpers like CNN talking head Ana Navarro disputed the latest polls indicating mushrooming black support for Trump.
In a racist tweet, Navarro chirped:  “Zero chance this is accurate. Zero. The poll must have only been conducted in the homes of Ben Carson, Kanye, that sheriff guy with the hat and those two Cubic Zirconia & Polyester-Spandex ladies.

Who’s the RACIST NOW? Stand up. Unreal the true colors of people (AND THAT”S NOT RACIST) is what comes out of their mouths. What a racist comment. Don’t think we don’t see through this hypocrisy.

Ana Navarro fumes over rising black Trump support, digs deep hole with ‘racist tweet’

CNN’s favorite Trump-bashing Republican Ana Navarro fumed over rising black Trump support, launches a ‘racist’ tweet and gets eviscerated online.
However, Victor Davis Hanson — a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, a public-policy think tank — said the trend indicated by the polls is devastating for the Democrats.
“Even 20 percent African-American support for Trump would all but dismantle Democratic Party presidential hopes for 2020,” Hanson wrote at Real Clear Politics. “Hillary Clinton lost the 2016 election with 88 percent of the black vote. That was about a six-point falloff from Barack Obama’s share of the black vote in 2012.”
Hanson continued: “Even a small drop in African-American turnout or anything less than the usual 85 percent to 90 percent supermajority for a Democratic presidential candidate on Election Day can prove fatal.”
(Source: “Ingraham Angle”)
Hanson pointed out that the Democratic Party’s alienation of white voters will ensure their defeat. Why? Because you can’t afford to ignore an entire group of voters.  “Republican presidential candidates now routinely win 55 percent to 60 percent of the so-called white vote, and about 70 percent of voters are white,” Hanson wrote. “That lopsided margin may widen further, given that progressive Democrats are not making any effort to recapture turned-off white working-class voters.”
Victor Davis Hanson remarked that President Trump is outworking the Democrats (as usual). And that will likely drive him home to victory in 2020.  “Trump is reaching out to the African-American community to a much greater degree than progressives are reaching out to the estranged white working class,” Hanson noted.

New York Times, Truth, and the Navy Seal

Column Contribution from Member Winter Haven 912

     WOW! The NY Times never, ever seems to disappoint. They ran a very long front-page story on Sunday about Chief Gallagher, the NAVY SEAL who is at the center of the controversy that led to the firing of the Sec of the Navy. Let’s start with a few facts that almost always seem to elude the NY Times; #1 is that the Sec of the Navy was actually fired for trying to go “behind the back” of the Sec of Defense (directly to the President), The Navy Secretary’s boss.
 So deliberately breaking the Chain of Command and a deliberate attempt to not abide by it was the real reason for the dismissal of Sec Spencer. He deserved exactly what he received, and that has nothing to do with the NAVY SEAL issue, NOTHING!
     Now let’s get to the NY Times story which has one purpose and one purpose only, to decry President Trump’s interference in the case. The NY Times invests approximately 1500 words into a story (BTW, that is almost 2/3rds of an entire page) which attempts to take Chief Gallagher to the woodshed over his personal conduct.
     They make such inflamed references to his desire to get “back into action to kill as many people as possible.” For the record, that is exactly what “SPECIAL OPPS GUYS” are trained to do! They are NOT trained as local policemen, that is not a “knock” on the local law enforcement, but SPECIAL OPPS WARRIORS are not trained to enforce the local law in your local hometown.

They are trained to kill the enemy, not wound them, not protect them, but kill them, and kill as many as they can.

      We train and send these guys into the absolute worst hell on earth and we expect “POLITICAL CORRECTNESS”? You have to be kidding me! Back to the NY Times, you have to read about 1500 words into the story to find out that Chief Gallagher was acquitted of all charges EXCEPT posing with ” a trophy photo of a corpse. This was not a smart move by the Chief but it was not an illegal act, it goes on all the time.

Not smart in today’s world, but NOT ILLEGAL, and most certainly not worthy of Chief Gallagher being “stripped of his TRIDENT” after 19 years of no disciplinary action against him during his time in the SEALS, not a single one.

This was nothing more than the “BRASS IN THE PENTAGON” deciding they didn’t like being embarrassed (they lost the case and the President stepped in) so they would skewer Chief Gallagher regardless of the actions taken by the President. The guy who is actually at the top of the SACRED CHAIN of COMMAND.

     Seems that the Admirals like the Chain of Command as long as they don’t have to follow the rules, funny how that works!!  So, the NY Times has an agenda, they didn’t care about all the inflamed language they used to describe Chief Gallagher’s personality. (and they used a bunch), they didn’t care that he was found innocent.

They also never mentioned in the entire more than 2000 words that the JAG Officers that prosecuted Chief Gallagher broke the law! You know what they did? The NY Times never tells you!  They illegally tape recorded conversations between Chief Gallagher and his defense team,WOW. If that had happened in civilian life those guys would most likely have been disbarred.  The entire case would have been dismissed. But the NY Times never tells you that part of the story, and it was one of the main reasons the Chief was found innocent.

So like I said, the NY TIMES never seems to fail in being an honest broker of news, no they have shed all honesty for their AGENDA, and their AGENDA is to do whatever they think they can to make Donald Trump look like he is abusing his authority.
He is not, he is doing exactly what the  CONSTITUTION permits him to do, in some cases, requires him to do, and certainly why he was elected, and neither the NY Times or the DEEP STATE is going to stop him..

Floyd Stern


House GOP report says no evidence for Trump
impeachment, warns of ‘dangerous precedent’

House Republicans delivered a point-by-point rebuttal Monday to Democrats’ impeachment efforts, claiming in their own report that the evidence collected in the inquiry to date does not support the accusations leveled against President Trump — or rise to the level of removal from office.
“The evidence presented does not prove any of these Democrat allegations, and none of the Democrats’ witnesses testified to having evidence of bribery, extortion, or any high crime or misdemeanor,” Republicans said in a 123-page report, timed to be made public ahead of the majority Democrats’ impeachment report.
The dueling narratives are emerging following two weeks of House Intelligence Committee hearings, where witnesses detailed their own knowledge of efforts to pressure Ukraine to launch political probes as U.S. aid was withheld over the summer. The committee is set to vote on Democrats’ final report Tuesday – likely to be another party-line moment – before transmitting that document to the Judiciary Committee, which holds its first public hearing Wednesday.
House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Devin Nunes, R-Calif.; Oversight Committee Ranking Member Jim Jordan, R-Ohio; and Foreign Affairs Committee Ranking Member Michael McCaul, R-Texas, penned the minority report, which has been reviewed by Fox News. In it, they broadly defend the president’s actions in the face of accusations he withheld military aid and a White House meeting as leverage to pressure Ukraine to launch a probe involving the Bidens.
“The Democrats’ impeachment inquiry is not the organic outgrowth of serious misconduct; it is an orchestrated campaign to upend our political system,” the Republicans wrote.
They added: “This impeachment inquiry and the manner in which the Democrats are pursuing it sets a dangerous precedent.”
At the center of the impeachment inquiry, which began in September, is Trump’s July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, in which he asked for an investigation into Joe Biden’s efforts to oust a prosecutor who had been looking into Ukrainian natural gas firm Burisma Holdings, where son Hunter Biden served on the board. That call prompted a whistleblower complaint, and, in turn, the impeachment inquiry.
The president’s request to Zelensky came after millions in U.S. military aid to Ukraine had been frozen, which Democrats and witnesses have claimed shows a “quid pro quo” arrangement. Trump has denied any wrongdoing, and Republicans have defended his position.
In their report, Republicans argued the evidence found throughout the impeachment inquiry “does not establish that President Trump pressured Ukraine” to investigate the Bidens “for the purpose of benefiting him in the 2020 election.”
Nunes, Jordan and McCaul argued that a July 25 call summary released by the White House “does not reflect any improper pressure of conditionality to pressure Ukraine to investigate” Joe Biden, noting that “President Zelensky has publicly and repeatedly said he felt no pressure to investigate” the president’s “political rival.”
Republicans specifically claimed that there was no evidence to support the accusation that Trump withheld a meeting with Zelensky to pressure Ukraine to investigate the Bidens for his 2020 re-election benefit. They noted that the president “extended an invitation to the White House to President Zelensky on three occasions without conditions,” and that the two eventually met in the U.S. during the United Nations General Assembly in September “without any Ukrainian action to investigate” the Bidens.
Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland, however, described the initial withholding of a Trump meeting as a clear “quid pro quo” in his testimony last month.
Sondland also testified that the linkage to the aid was as obvious as “two plus two equals four” – while acknowledging he never heard either condition from Trump himself.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and fellow Democrats argue the evidence of wrongdoing is overwhelming.


Rep. Jim Jordan: Impeachment inquiry is not good for our nation


“The fact that Republicans may be derelict in their duty does not relieve us of our obligation to uphold and defend the Constitution,” Schiff tweeted last week.
Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., also ripped Trump for not fully cooperating with Congress.
“If the President thinks the call was ‘perfect’ and there is nothing to hide then he would turn over the thousands of pages of documents requested by Congress, allow witnesses to testify instead of blocking testimony with baseless privilege claims, and provide any exculpatory information that refutes the overwhelming evidence of his abuse of power,” he said in a statement.
Democrats have argued that the aid was only delivered because the administration got caught withholding it.
Still, Republicans have repeatedly pointed to the fact that the Ukrainians eventually got the aid – and a meeting – to counter any bribery accusations. Nunes, Jordan and McCaul wrote that the evidence “does not establish” that Trump withheld military aid to extract a probe regarding the Bidens, noting that the president “has been skeptical about U.S. taxpayer-funded foreign assistance,” and has been “clear and consistent” in his view that Europe should “pay its fair share for regional defense.”
“Although security assistance to Ukraine was paused in July 2019, several witnesses testified that U.S. security assistance was not linked to any Ukrainian action on investigations,” they wrote, adding that “the security assistance was ultimately disbursed to Ukraine in September 2019 without any Ukrainian action to investigate the President’s political rival.”
The GOP report also defended Trump’s decision to remove then-U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch from her post, noting he had the “constitutional authority” to do so. And the report defended Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, stating he “did not violate the law or harm national security.”
Meanwhile, Nunes, Jordan and McCaul went on to defend the president’s interest in Hunter Biden’s role, saying that “there are legitimate concerns” surrounding his position on the board during Joe Biden’s role in leading Ukraine policy during the Obama administration. They also said Trump’s concerns are “valid,” and recalled previous witness testimony revealing that “the Obama State Department noted concerns about Hunter Biden’s relationship with Burisma in 2015 and 2016.”
As for Democrats’ allegations of an attempted “cover-up” and obstruction by the president – allegations that could relate to potential articles of impeachment — Nunes, Jordan and McCaul noted that Trump “declassified and released publicly” the summary of his July 25 phone call with Zelensky and released a redacted version of the whistleblower complaint.
Democrats, they charged, “have engaged in an abusive process toward a pre-determined outcome.”
“The impeachment of a president is one of the gravest and most solemn duties of the House of Representatives,” they wrote. “For Democrats, impeachment is a tool for settling political scores and re-litigating election results with which they disagreed.”

Adam Schiff is helping the very person he wants to destroy, President Trump, with such a misguided and failed mission

Adam Schiff Wins Ringside Politics Turkey Of The Year Award

Jeff Crouere imageBy  —— Bio and ArchivesDecember 1, 2019
Cover Story | Print Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us
Adam Schiff Wins Ringside Politics Turkey Of The Year Award

Since the beginning of the Ringside Politics TV and radio shows, we have enjoyed an annual Thanksgiving tradition of awarding our “Turkey of the Year” to recognize individuals who distinguished themselves in a particularly foolish way. It seems appropriate since turkeys are commonly regarded as one of the most dim-witted animals on the planet.

The winners are selected by our viewers and listeners and each year it is a robust competition with many deserving celebrities and politicians. Previous winners have included both Democrats and Republicans, so it is truly a bi-partisan award. Here is a partial listing of some of our past top turkeys: filmmaker Michael Moore, former House Speakers John Boehner and Nancy Pelosi, former President Barack Obama and former New Orleans Mayors Mitch Landrieu and, current federal inmate, Ray Nagin.

Schiff has been suffering from a horrible case of “Trump Derangement Syndrome” for years

In 2018, former Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R-WI) was the clear choice for Turkey of the Year. Ryan is an establishment Republican who was a very weak House Speaker. His major accomplishment was the passage of the tax cut bill. He failed to deliver on an array of important issues such as border security and entitlement reform. He did not pursue an aggressive or conservative agenda. In fact, his weak leadership was one of the major reasons that the Republicans lost control of the House of Representatives in the 2018 midterm elections. This led to the impeachment nightmare and the constant harassment of President Donald Trump, which probably delighted Ryan who take advantage of every opportunity to criticize the President.

This year, our viewers and listeners nominated several dozen individuals and groups, all with outstanding credentials to become our Ringside Politics Turkey of the Year. Nevertheless, the clear winner with the most votes and the best choice for our 2019 award is House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA).

Schiff has been suffering from a horrible case of “Trump Derangement Syndrome” for years. Ever since the President’s election, Schiff has been obsessed with his impeachment. He was so driven to destroy the President that he allowed some Russian comedians to prank him on a phone call promising to provide pictures of “naked Trump.”

After the President released the transcript of his call with his Ukrainian counterpart, Schiff realized that the details were too benign, so he fabricated the contents of the call in a “parody” speech to the American people from his seat as Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.

For weeks, he conducted secret impeachment hearings and interviewed witnesses in the basement of the U.S. Capitol. It was so biased and unfair that Republicans stormed into the hearings to protest the proceedings.

The American people are becoming fatigued with this unfair partisan process

Eventually, the public phase of the hearings was announced, and all the news media eagerly anticipated the “Schiff Show.” In fact, all the major broadcast and cable news networks televised the hearings. Instead of producing bombshell testimony implicating the President in a crime, Schiff presented to the American people a collection of witnesses who relied on hearsay and did not ever directly talk to the President. Some of the witnesses had never met the President.

The result of the process is that millions of Americans were turned off by the entire stunt. Despite coverage on all the broadcast and cable news networks, only 13.1 million people watched the first day of the hearings. This is a sharp decline from the audience of over 20 million Americans who watched the Judge Brett Kavanaugh hearings or the 19 million Americans who watched the testimony of former FBI Director James Comey.

It seems the American people realize there are major problems with the impeachment process. The inquiry was approved by the House of Representatives without a single vote from a Republican member, while two Democrats voted with the Republicans against launching the inquiry.

Schiff has devoted all his committee’s attention to this witch hunt and failed miserably. After two weeks of public hearings on the impeachment of President Trump, the result is that more people are sympathetic of President Trump and fewer people want to impeach him.

The American people are becoming fatigued with this unfair partisan process. According to a recent poll by Emerson College, support for impeachment has fallen from 48% to only 43% in the last month, while opposition has increased from 44% to 45%. The Emerson College poll also showed that the President’s approval rating has increased from 43% to 48% in the last month.

Schiff’s misguided and failed mission

While Schiff and his colleagues are focused on impeachment, the American people want Congress to address other issues. In a recent piece published in Vanity Fair, Ken Stern examined poll results of independent voters who ranked impeachment last among 11 issues. These independent voters were primarily concerned with fiscal health, the budget deficit, infrastructure among other longstanding concerns. Instead of dealing with these issues, Schiff and other House Democrats are trying to destroy President Trump.

Eventually, Schiff’s antics may cause a backlash against House Democrats, especially for those 31 members who represent districts won by Trump in the 2016 election.

Our country will soon know the outcome of impeachment and how it will impact the 2020 election. In the meantime, we know Congressman Adam Schiff is helping the very person he wants to destroy, President Trump. With such a misguided and failed mission, Schiff is a perfect choice for our 2019 Ringside Politics Turkey of the Year.

Jeff Crouere — Bio and Archives
Jeff Crouere is a native of New Orleans, LA. He is the host of a Louisiana-based program, “Ringside Politics,” which airs at 7:30 p.m. Friday & 10:00 p.m. Sunday on WLAE-TV 32, a PBS station; and 7 till 11 a.m. weekdays on WGSO 990 AM in the New Orleans area & worldwide.
Jeff Crouere’s Youtube Channel
For more information or to order his new book, America’s Last Chance, visit his website  For questions or to schedule Jeff for media appearances, email him at


Alarmists Propose Rebranding ‘Climate Change’ for Greater Shock Value

Pelosi Pulling Scarier Name Changes For Climate Change Out Of The Hat

Judi McLeod imageBy  —— Bio and ArchivesDecember 2, 2019
Cover Story |  | Print Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us

Pelosi Pulling Scarier Name Changes For Climate Change Out Of The Hat
The UN’s COP25 Climate Change Conference with a retinue of Nancy Pelosi-led Democrats, kicking off in Madrid today, puts a deep winter freeze on Adam Schiff’s Traveling Impeachment ‘Inquiry’ show.
The Dems,  jetting 3,781 miles across the Atlantic, have left  colleagues Schiff and tag team partner Jerry Nadler far behind, at least for the time being.
Only last week they were interested in name calling of any kind to impeach President Donald Trump.

COP25: Rebrand the name of Climate Change

Today it’s name changing that holds their impassioned interest.
The big move at COP25 is to rebrand (read change) the name of Climate Change, which long ago reached the dizzy heights of household word status.
“Writing for AdAge this week, Aaron Hall argues that in order to get people to “take action” against climate change, “rebranding” is crucial, since people have gotten too used to the idea that climate is changing and need to be shocked into the notion that the world as we know it is ending. (Breitbart, Nov. 29, 2019)

“Is there a better way to convey the urgency of the situation, while also encouraging folks to take action? Could the tools of branding and brand naming create a more resonant, powerful name?” Mr. Hall asks.

“What he and his marketing team came up with was a series of much more frightening labels to stick on climate change in the hope of jolting people into meaningful engagement.

Global Meltdown, Global Melting, Climate Collapse, Climate Chaos, Scorched Earth

“The terms “Global Meltdown” or “Global Melting,” for instance, deliver a more negative image than mere “Global Warming,” he contends. “The names signal that ice caps are melting, but also create a more visceral image in the mind — that real feeling of ‘melting’ when it’s too hot outside. A meltdown is a disastrous event that draws from the ultimate terror of a nuclear meltdown, an apt metaphor for global destruction.

“Climate Collapse” and “Climate Chaos,” on the other hand, “instill a clear message or even a direct call to action,” Hall notes, adding that “there’s nothing neutral about collapse or chaos.”

“To up the rhetoric even more, Hall proposes the weaponized term “Scorched Earth.”

“Sometimes a brand name needs to be hyperbolic to truly capture hearts and minds. If we don’t take massive action now, Earth will be uninhabitable — an irreversible barren wasteland,” he insists.” 

Ear-splitting cheers from the AOC corner, where children being told they will be dead from Climate Change 12 years from now—a lie every bit as “hyperbolic” as the proposed name change.

AdAge claims:
Incendiary language is necessary to motivate people

“Scorched Earth’ paints the direst picture of what’s to come and what we must avoid and is likely the edgiest brand name from our exploration.”

“Whatever we call it, impending climate doom is upon us if we don’t act quickly,” Hall concludes. “Perhaps a new name will shift the needle, even if just a little.”

“Mr. Hall’s contention that it does not matter if what is said is true as long as it elicits the necessary response is reminiscent of similar assertions by leaders of the Extinction Rebellion (XR) movement.

“Spokespersons of the movement have acknowledged that their claims that billions of people are going to die from climate change have no basis whatsoever in scientific fact but are necessary to provoke the kind of response that is needed to cut back on greenhouse gas emissions.

“Pressed last month on what the basis was for predictions of mass deaths, XR spokesperson Zion Lights acknowledged there is no real ground for these predictions, but contended that such incendiary language is necessary to motivate people, confessing that “alarmist language works.”

Pelosi’s attendance at COP25 is mostly insignificant

Other than throwing the odd name change suggestion, Pelosi’s attendance at COP25 is mostly insignificant.

“Pelosi’s team claims it will will seek to “reaffirm the commitment of the American people to combating the climate crisis” at the 2019 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, also called COP25, her office said on Saturday confirming the trip. (Breitbart, Dec. 1, 2019)

“This is despite the fact the Speaker of the House will represent nobody but herself and her party as she is prevented by law from conducting foreign policy or make any agreements with foreign leaders regarding sovereign treaties.”

Climate Change alarmists, including Pelosi Dems, ignore proof that name changing doesn’t always work.

New York Mayor Bill de Blasio for example: “When he was 22, he adopted his mother’s surname because his father was “largely absent” and he wanted to embrace his Italian heritage. (Wikipedia) “He hyphenated it to Warren de Blasio-Wilhelm in 1983, and formally adopted the name Bill de Blasio in December 2001.”

As Bill de Blasio, many still refer to Warren Wilhelm as that “blankety-blank Commie”.

Then there’s now running for president, ex-New York Mayor billionaire Michael Bloomberg, who because of his soda-taxing, snack-attacking control freak style, is still called “Nanny” Bloomberg.

Democrats have transitioned from Impeaching Trump to the Climate Crisis as “the Greatest Test We Have Ever Faced

“Bloomberg has cast himself as the great healer of the political divide, calling for us to transcend labels, “offer solutions and “opened hands” instead of “hysterics”, “fear mongering” and “pointed fingers”. (Michelle Malkin, Toronto Sun, Nov.10, 2018)

“President Donald Trump officially withdrew the U.S. from the Paris Climate Accord in October as part of an election promise to voters, saying he was “elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris.” (White House, June 1, 2017)

The mainstream  and social media appear to have overlooked that the final U.S. withdrawal from the landmark accord is scheduled for November 4, 2020, a day after the next presidential election.

“Several Democratic presidential aspirants have said that, if elected, they would immediately return to the agreement.” (AFP, Nov. 30, 2019)

“Dem Rep. Casten: ‘The Climate Crisis Is the Greatest Test We Have Ever Faced.’

What further proof that the Democrats have transitioned from Impeaching Trump to the Climate Crisis as “the Greatest Test We Have Ever Faced”?

Mother Earth is not melting under our feet, the desperado Democrats are.

Judi McLeod — Bio and Archives
Copyright © Canada Free Press
RSS Feed for Judi McLeod
Judi McLeod is an award-winning journalist with 30 years’ experience in the print media. A former Toronto Sun columnist, she also worked for the Kingston Whig Standard. Her work has appeared on Rush Limbaugh,, Drudge Report,
Older articles by Judi McLeod


John Nelson -
Bob Gilmore
Dick Fankhauser

WP2Social Auto Publish Powered By :