Connect with us

The Swamp

Parscale Dogs Sessions, NeverTrump ‘Reagan Battalion’ Defends

Published

on

A twitter account run by at least one known NeverTrumper is defending the inaction of Attorney General Jeff Sessions regarding the phony Russian “collusion” investigation.

“Time to fire Sessions,” tweeted Brad Parscale, Trump’s 2020 campaign manager. “End the Mueller investigation. You can’t obstruct something that was phony against you. The IG Report gives [President Trump] the truth to end it all.”

The Reagan Battalion proceeded to white knight for the Attorney General, who has been missing in action since day one of the Trump Presidency.

“Reminder: Jeff Sessions was the first and only GOP Senator to endorse Donald Trump for President during the GOP primaries, fair to assume that Trump wouldn’t have won the primaries without Session’s (sic) support,” Reagan Battalion replied.

Parscale then dropped the hammer.

“Total crap,” he said. “[Trump] could have won the entire thing with his cell phone and airplane. He didn’t need anyone to win the primary. Sessions was a great supporter, but made critical mistakes once confirmed.”

The Reagan Battalion is a shadowy Twitter account that enjoys support from the NeverTrump crowd.

Gateway Pundit reported:

“The Reagan Battalion has been previously tied to far left liberal PACs, Soros-funded activist groups, while enjoying a very cozy relationship with #NeverTrumper Ben Shapiro.

Reagan Battalion has gone out of their way to attack President Trump and other Pro-Trump conservatives at every turn, in a since deleted tweet, they proclaimed “The choice is abundantly clear! You either stand with Donald Trump & the KKK, or with the #NeverTrump movement!” Sounds pretty similar to what far-left political activists and NeoCons keep saying, right?

Back in February, you might also remember that The Gateway Pundit reported fairly extensively on collusion between Soros far left groups, #NeverTrumpers who paid for opposition research, and an Even McMullin campaign site.”

Gateway Pundit Passage Ends. 

Those who follow Republican politics closely have the Reagan Battalion figured out.

“FYI, the “Reagan Battalion” twitter feed is run by Trump-hating, police-state liberals. Don’t be fooled for a moment by these clowns,” said former Secret Service member and pundit Dan Bongino on Twitter.

https://twitter.com/dbongino/status/1001169115103580160

With the Reagan Battalion’s sordid history of Trump hating, it is fair to say that the America First movement need not be taking its cues from them.

The Swamp

What Happens If John Roberts Decides Not to Preside Over Trump’s Post-Presidency Impeachment Trial?

Trying to make sense of a messy situation.

Published

on

Several Republicans and Democrats familiar with the negotiations over Donald Trump’s second impeachment trial have said that Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts does not want to preside.

A Politico report that broke the news reads as follows: “We’re hearing that Roberts, who for years has sought to keep the courts apolitical, was not happy he became a top target of the left during Trump’s first impeachment trial. ‘He wants no further part of this,’ one of our Hill sources says. A spokesperson for the chief justice declined to comment.”

As if it weren’t unprecedented enough for a president to have been impeached twice, Democratic lawmakers are hell-bent on holding an impeachment trial for a man who is no longer president. And it sounds like they’re going to get their wish: Senate leaders agreed Friday that the trial would begin Tuesday, February 9. It does not appear that Roberts’ decision is a factor either way.

This clown show needs some unpacking. First off, Roberts has very good reason to reject presiding over Trump’s impeachment trial. The Constitution states that the chief justice will preside when the president is tried. Not the ex-president, the current president. That alone should be sufficient.

take our poll - story continues below

POLL: Will Republican Senators vote to impeach Trump and ban him from running in 2024?

  • POLL: Will Republican Senators vote to impeach Trump and ban him from running in 2024? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Despite this, there may not be anything that expressly forbids Congress from impeaching and convicting former officials. Some legal experts have pointed out that “nothing in the text of the Constitution bars Congress from impeaching, convicting, and disqualifying former officials from holding future office.”

In light of all this, the radio silence of the Founders on this matter allows both sides to justify their support or opposition. Those in opposition say that because there’s nothing in the Constitution about trying a former president, there are no grounds to hold the trial. Those in support say that because there’s nothing in the Constitution about trying a former president, there is no legal reason to oppose the trial.

Furthermore, law professor Frank Bowman, speaking to the Washington Examiner, argued that if a trial is going to be held, it might be prudent for Roberts to preside.

“The vice president does have a personal interest in the outcome, insofar as conviction would eliminate Trump as a future political rival, either to President Biden or to Harris herself,” Bowman said. “I think the constitutionally safer call is that he should preside. That way, there can never be a later objection on the ground that the tribunal was not properly constituted.”

If Chief Justice Roberts decides to extricate himself from this mess, Democrats are said to be discussing the possibility of having Vice President Kamala Harris, who is also the president of the Senate, preside. Also being floated is president pro tempore and longest-serving senator Patrick Leahy.

Harris has a conflict of interest if she were to preside, however. And indeed that is why the Founders wanted the chief justice of a (theoretically) non-political entity of government to do so. Harris is not only of the opposite party and was on the ticket that defeated the Trump/Pence ticket, she might very well have aspirations for the presidency if Biden decides not to seek reelection. Trump himself may have his eye on the presidency once again as well, meaning that Harris would be presiding over the impeachment trial of a potential political opponent.

So if the legality of convicting an ex-president is gray, then it becomes a question of prudence. And prudence dictates that the impeachment trial should not proceed. The side that’s calling for “unity” is engaging in something fundamentally disunifying. Any attempt to convict a former president with no clear legal grounds is most definitely not a recipe for “unity” and “healing.” Our senators should just move on and worry about governing. Enough with the political shams and shenanigans.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending