Hillary Clinton isn’t winning Texas.

Democratic public relations firm The Washington Post once published a piece titled Could Hillary Clinton actually win Texas?

Democrats aren’t winning the Senate.

The Hill published a piece before Election Day titled Democrats on the Senate: We got this.

Trump is not getting impeached.

I explain exactly why in this H. A. Goodman YouTube segment.

If Hillary Clinton can break State Department rules by storing Special Access Program intelligence on an unencrypted private server (that nobody at State had access to), simply for convenience, then Trump isn’t getting impeached.

First, there are 241 Republicans and only 194 Democrats in the House of Representatives, and there first needs to be a majority in the House.

Then, there must be a 2/3 vote in the Senate for impeachment, and the GOP controls the Senate with 52 seats, with Democrats holding only 46 seats.

So, not going to happen, and don’t think the “good Republicans” will suddenly help the Democratic Party. 53% of white women voted for Trump, over possibly the first female president. Also, Trump was warmly received at this year’s CPAC convention. As NPR stated after the conservative gathering, “President Trump’s status with the Conservative Political Action Conference has gone from ‘it’s complicated’ to a full-on committed relationship.”

Aside from the inability of Democrats to get Congress on board with impeachment, Trump didn’t help Russia hack the DNC. Forgive the lengthy quote, but CNBC lists all the questions FBI Director James Comey refused (“no comment”) to answer:

  • Adam Schiff, D-Calif.: “Was there any request made by the FBI or Justice Department to wiretap Donald Trump, turned down by a court?”

  • Schiff: “Are you aware that [Roger Stone] was a partner of Paul Manafort?” (Stone has been an advisor to Trump. Manafort was the Trump’s campaign chairman until he resigned in August.)

  • Schiff: “Do you know how Mr. Stone would have known that Mr. Podesta’s emails were going to be released?” (John Podesta was chairman of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.)

  • Schiff: “Do you know that Mr. Podesta has said that at the time he was not even aware of whether his emails that had been stolen would be published?”

  • Terri Sewell, D-Ala.: “Can you say with any specificity what kind of coordination or contacts you’re looking at in your investigation generally when confronted with something like this?”

  • Sewell: “Can you discuss whether or not there was any knowledge by any Trump-related person and the Russians?”

  • Sewell: “Can you characterize what the nature of your investigation generally — when you do an investigation of this sort — can you talk a little bit about the process, generally?”

  • Trey Gowdy, R-S.C.: “Do you know whether Director Clapper knew the name of the U.S. citizen that appeared in The New York Times and The Washington Post?”

  • Gowdy: “Did you brief President Obama on any calls involving Michael Flynn?”

  • Gowdy: “Director Comey, there’s been some speculation this morning on motive. I’m not all that interested in motive. First of all, it’s really hard to prove. Secondarily, you never have to prove it. But I get that people want to know. I get the jury always wants to know why. I think you and I can agree there are a couple of reasons that you would not have to unlawfully, feloniously disseminate classified material. It certainly wasn’t done to help an ongoing criminal investigation, because you already had the information, didn’t you?”

  • Schiff: “Director Comey, are you aware that Roger Stone played a role on the Trump campaign?”

  • Schiff: “Have you read press reports where Mr. Stone proudly boasts of engaging in political dirty tricks?”

  • Schiff: “I mentioned before that Mr. Stone was in direct communication with a creature of Russian G.R.U. — ‘Guccifer 2.0’ — and that’s something the intelligence assessment talked about, the role of ‘Guccifer 2.0.’ Mr. Stone, on August 17— are you aware — received communication from ‘Guccifer 2.0’ that said, ‘I’m pleased to say that you are great. Please let me know if I can help you anyhow. It would be a great pleasure to me.’ Are you aware of that communication from, essentially from Russian G.R.U. through ‘Guccifer 2.0’ to Mr. Stone?”

  • Schiff: “Are you aware that Mr. Stone also stated publicly that he was in direct communication with Julian Assange and Wikileaks?”

  • Schiff: “Are you aware that Mr. Stone also claimed that he was in touch with an intermediary of Mr. Assange”

  • Schiff: “In early October, are you aware that Mr. Stone tweeted, “I have total confidence that my hero, Julian Assange, will educate the American people soon”? Are you aware of that tweet?

  • Schiff: “And are you aware that it was only days later that Wikileaks released the Podesta emails?”

  • Himes, D.-Conn.: “Paul Manafort, as reported in The New York Times and other outlets, and his deputy, Rick Gates, ran a campaign in Washington to lobby government officials and push positive press coverage of pro-Russian Ukrainian officials. Paul Manafort began officially working for former Ukrainian President Yanukovych at least as far back as 2007, according to The Washington Post. It was only discovered by Ukraine’s new national anti-corruption bureau, which found secret ledgers in Kiev indicating almost $13 million in undisclosed cash payments from Ukrainian government coffers to Paul Manafort for lobbying done between 2007 and 2012 for Mr. Yanukovych. Director Comey, did Paul Manafort ever register as a foreign agent under FARA [Foreign Agent Registration Act]?”

  • Himes: “Paul Manafort was, however, Donald Trump’s campaign manager in July of 2016, correct?”

  • Himes: “Have you been asked to provide assistance to the current Ukrainian government with respect to Paul Manafort, and how do you intend to respond to that request?

  • Himes: “The story says that the DOJ confirmed that there have been requests for assistance on this matter. You can’t go as far as confirming that, in fact, there have been these requests made?”

  • Sewell: “Does the FBI generally assume that Russian ambassadors to the United States, like Ambassador Kislyak, are at least overtly collecting intelligence on influential Americans, especially political leaders?”

  • Sewell: “Would someone like Ambassador Kislyak play [the role of a spy acting as a diplomat] for Russia?”

  • Devin Nunes, R.-Calif.: “Do you think that [inaudible] Russians would not be trained to infiltrate Hillary Clinton’s campaign, get information on Hillary Clinton and try to get to people that are around that campaign or The Clinton Foundation?”

  • Peter King, R.-N.Y.: “Do either you or Adm. Rogers have any reason to disagree with the conclusion of Gen. Clapper that there’s no evidence of collusion between the Russians and the Trump campaign?”

  • Schiff: “I’m not going to put you in the spot of answering whether this is an accurate characterization of Mr. Trump’s views, but it would be logical for the Kremlin to want someone [elected president] who had a dim view of NATO?”

  • Schiff: “Would [the Russians] have a preference for a candidate that expressed an openness repealing the sanctions over Ukraine?”

  • Sewell: “I’m sure you can understand my concern that Mr. Flynn not only failed to disclose the contacts with the Russian ambassador, but he said he did not remember whether he discussed sanctions against Russia with that ambassador. I find that really hard to believe. Wouldn’t you think that at the height of our concern about Russian hacking that Mr. Flynn would have remembered meeting with the Russian ambassador and would have told him to stop meddling in our affairs, but that didn’t happen, did it?”

  • Sewell: “Now, Mr. Comey, do you think that Mr. Flynn’s failure to disclose the communication and contact he had with the Russian ambassador and their topic of conversation, along with the blatant lie to Vice President Pence meet the standard for an investigation by the FBI?”

  • Sewell: “Given Russia’s long-standing desire to cultivate relations with influential U.S. persons, isn’t the American public right to be concerned about Mr. Flynn’s conduct? His failure to disclose that contact with the Russian ambassador, his attempts to cover it up and what looks like the White House’s attempts to sweep this under the rug — don’t we, as American people, have a right to know and shouldn’t our FBI investigate such claims?”

Essentially, any of the questions above, if answered with evidence, could possibly lead to Trump’s impeachment. Yet, James Comey refused to answer them.

His silence was deafening.

The “no comment” from Comey speaks volumes, especially since the New York Times published an October 31, 2016 piece titled Investigating Donald Trump, F.B.I. Sees No Clear Link to Russia.

James Comey had so much evidence of Trump/Russia collusion that he not only allowed Trump to win on Election Day, but also signed the Comey Letter to sink Clinton’s chances.

Wait… what?


Focus on banning fracking, Democrats, like Jill Stein advocates in the following Green Party statement:

Scientists have reported a surge in global emissions of the potent greenhouse gas methane over the past decade, with the United States responsible for as much as 60% of the growth.

This methane surge shows that fracking isn’t just a dire threat to our health and drinking water. It’s far worse for our climate than than the industry will admit.

Join Jill Stein’s call to ban all new fracking now, and begin an immediate transition to 100% clean renewable energy by 2030!

Like Bernie Sanders, Stein, Cheri Honkala and other progressive champions, the effort to ban fracking is something that could unite all Democrats to address climate change.

Only 50’s era Republicans become enamored with Russian hackers, and unfortunately, the Democratic Party is full of 50’s era Republicans.

The only way to defeat Trump is to defeat the Democratic Party’s version of pragmatism. Not only is it pragmatic to push for a fracking ban, but it offers voters the antithesis of Trump’s energy policies; regulations aren’t the antithesis of GOP energy policies. Think big, Democrats, or Trump goes eight years.

Furthermore, the FBI, NSA and CIA have no evidence (just ask James Tapper) directly linking Trump to Russian hackers. The FBI and NSA gave no direct evidence during the Russia hearing, and as you can see above, Comey refused to answer any revealing questions.

Simply hiding behind an “ongoing investigation” that started before Election Day doesn’t overshadow the fact Comey refused to provide direct evidence of Trump/Russia collusion. If circumstantial evidence was enough to convict people, Hillary Clinton would have already been charged under the Espionage Act.

Finally, Trump and Russia didn’t know Democrats would cheat Bernie Sanders.

WikiLeaks was kind enough to Retweet my previous Counter Propa piece on Donna Brazile cheating Bernie, and the corruption that led to CNN cutting ties with Brazile still exists at the DNC. Until Democrats fix this corruption, there’s no stopping Trump. Sadly, you can kiss your dreams of Trump impeachment goodbye, especially without direct evidence of wrongdoing.

Liked it? Take a second to support Counter Propa on Patreon!

There are 9 Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

  1. The demise of the Democrats started with the creation of the DLC, and the subsequent election of Bill Clinton. It began the process of giving the voters a choice of GOP and GOP lite. Some could call the two party system a facade to make the voters think that they are making real choices.

  2. Democrats are not going to ban fracking either. I’ll bet that no more than 10% of Congressional Democrats would vote for such a ban, if that. They’re taking money from the oil companies, just like the Republicans. And I’ve even heard several of my more “liberal” friends talk positively about how being “Saudi America” makes us so much more secure from terrorism.

    Most Americans are materialistic, self-centered, emotionally immature and incredibly shallow. It isn’t economic injustice that is making them angry, it is the perception that the game is no longer tilted in their favor.

  3. Dear Hector Apollo Goodman,

    HA, I know this may be off topic, but I wanted to let you know, Hillary got a new haircut, a new coiffure, and you know what that means:

    All Is Forgiven!

    Everything is all better now and you and Jason Chaffetz can totally move on from the unencrypted private mail server and jump on the Russians Hacked The Election® bandwagon. Better late than never. There. Now. Don’t you feel better? I knew that you would. My country ’tis of thee…

  4. Dear Horace Augustus Goodman,

    HA, I am sending you a writeup of a scenario I have had in mind lately. Something to think about in this crazy time of Cold War 2.0. Thank you for your work.

    How To Start World War III:

    Step 1) Reduce and destabilize the government; fill it with loyalists.

    Two things work to accomplish this. Trump’s volatile personality causes staid lifelong public servants to quit their government jobs. Then, Trump’s Republican policy of making government smaller causes vacant positions to go intentionally unfilled, and those that are filled are staffed by Trump loyalists, whose desire to prove their loyalty exceeds their moral compass.

    Step 2) Destabilize the population through financial stress.

    This is being accomplished by Trump’s Republican trickle down policy of tax cuts for the rich and demonization of poor people. Once people begin to realize how fully they have been lied to and how hard they are being screwed they will start to rise up and riot, thus setting the stage for Step 3.

    Step 3) Once the above are in place and the populace is starting to riot, stage a false flag terrorist attack to create public sentiment for war.

    Step 4) Declare war very quickly, immediately, on whoever you want to blame for the false flag, and its GAME ON. Do this before people have had time to think. There will be no lifetime civil servants in government left to resist the Trump loyalists, who will be screaming that we have to start bombing everyone everywhere immediately. The people who want this war will be counting on this administrative confusion to get the bloodshed going before anyone has had time to stop and think.

    Steve Bannon is probably licking his chops waiting for the blood letting to start. Only the killing of 1.6 billion Muslims stand between him and his new Christian world.

    1. For those who remember, George “Dubya” Bush was on his way to becoming a one-term president when terrorists attacked on 9/11. Ironically, this saved his presidency. It is a well-known fact that presidents get a boost in popularity during war time because the populace doesn’t want to show “weakness” to the enemy.

      I, too, suspect that we will have another terrorist attack in the next year or two. The administration will know about it, but will do nothing to stop it. It’s the only way Trump can retain power.

    2. Why are we talking about fracking when Trump is easing emissions rules for automobiles?

      His plans will lead to more global climate change. The only reason Trump did this is because he wants to get back at Obama for putting these rules into place.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>