Daily Archives: November 10, 2019

November 10 Transparent Intimacy

Scripture Reading: Matthew 26:36–39

Key Verse: Matthew 26:38

Then He said to them, “My soul is exceedingly sorrowful, even to death. Stay here and watch with Me.”

Transparency is an oft-overlooked element in our path to growing closer to Jesus Christ. Intimacy with the Lord requires our full, humble, and honest openness before Him.

Jesus Himself was a wonderful model of openness as He dealt with His disciples. For instance, we read in today’s Bible verse that, in the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus shared with the disciples His anguish over His upcoming crucifixion and brief separation from God the Father.

Knowing that the sins of the entire world were about to be cast upon Him, Jesus grieved, even to the point of near death. Here was God, clothed in human flesh, being completely honest, open, and forthright about His emotions.

This is how Christ would have us react to Him. A proud, arrogant, egotistical, self-sufficient Christianity bristles at the thought of such transparency. “Why should I burden God with this when I can handle it myself? I’m just not going to deal with God about this.” Such thinking and behavior go against everything for which God created us. However, God cherishes and honors a humble, contrite spirit from someone trying to be him- or herself before the Lord.

Confess sin, worry, doubt, and fear. He already knows all, but your willingness to intimately share with Him all the details speaks volumes about the bent of your heart.

Father, I confess my worry, doubt, and fears. I want to share all the intimate details of my life with You.[1]

 

[1] Stanley, C. F. (2006). Pathways to his presence (p. 329). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

November 10 Take Out Your Earplugs

Scripture Reading: 1 Samuel 3:1–10

Key Verse: 1 Samuel 3:10

The Lord came and stood and called as at other times, “Samuel! Samuel!” And Samuel answered, “Speak, for Your servant hears.”

Visit a major airplane construction plant and you will be amazed by two things: the size of the airplanes under construction and the noise level.

Much of the machinery used to assemble aircraft is driven by air-pressure devices. Because of this, a person in the assembly plant is subjected to constant noise pollution. Safety is a top concern, and workers are given earplugs and safety glasses for protection. Plant managers also have keen eyes as to potential dangers. Once the earplugs are in place and the machinery turned on, there is no way you can yell to a coworker and be heard.

Many of God’s people are like employees in an airplane production plant. They cannot hear God’s voice because they are too busy assembling the pieces of their lives. They wear the earplugs of worldly thinking, becoming complacent toward the things of God. When the bottom drops out, they wonder why God allowed it. But in actuality, God spent months and in some cases years shouting warnings that went unheeded.

In your life, is it time to take out the earplugs, turn off the machinery of the world, and listen to God’s voice?

O Lord, I’m too busy trying to assemble my life. Please help me to take out my earplugs, turn off the machinery of the world, and listen to Your voice.[1]

 

[1] Stanley, C. F. (1999). On holy ground (p. 329). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

Don’t Believe the Fake Media — Unfathomable Grace

Satan would have you believe he is god. This is not the case. The devil is not equal to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

He would have you believe he is eternal. Again, this would be wrong. Lucifer is a created being. He was spoken into existence like you and me.

Satan would have you believe he is omnipresent. He would have you believe he is here, there, and everywhere. Friends, only God is ever-present. The Adversary has no such divine attribute.

The devil would also have you believe he is omnipotent. He presents himself as the “Dark Force” who holds equal power over the planet. Again, he has no such might. He has some abilities, but not sovereign power.

He would have you believe he is omniscient. Sure, the Accuser knows quite a bit. However, the Prince of Darkness is not bright enough to thwart the purposes of God.

Satan would have you believe he is winning, that momentum is heading in his direction, that Jesus is frustrated, and Christ’s church is going down for the count. Again, The Liar is wrong. All of this is “Fake News.”

So, what exactly is true truth? Where is Jesus today, what is he doing, and how powerful is he?

But from now on the Son of Man shall be seated at the right hand of the power of God.     (Luke 22:69)

The stoop of humiliation Jesus experienced was planned and foretold. It was always his intention to come, add a human nature, subject himself to men, be rejected, arrested, tried, tortured, blasphemed, crucified, and buried. All of this worked out in perfect accord with his eternal plan.

However, the stoop of humiliation was determined to be very temporary. Following his passion week, things took a different turn. His stage of exaltation began. Jesus magnificently showed himself to his friends on earth. After doing so, he ascended to the heavenly realm before his eyes. There, he took his rightful seat at the “right hand of the power of God.” And ever since, from the throne of God, Jesus has sovereignly ruled and reigned over the universe gifted to him by his Heavenly Father.

Oh, struggling friends, let’s pray that we might really believe this truth. Let’s pray that Christ’s Spirit might grant us greater knowledge, wisdom, and faith. I know you are confused. I know you are hurting. I know you are having a tough time giving thanks this Thanksgiving season, but Jesus really is Lord over …

  • Physical health and disease
  • Mental stability and disorder
  • Life and death
  • Marital vibrancy and divorce
  • Children following and falling
  • Generational blessings and curses
  • Ecclesiastical revival and hardening
  • Church unity and division
  • Religious freedom and oppression
  • Economic profitability and depression

Therefore, because Jesus is Lord, there is no need for any arrogance. He is the one working out his plans. When success and blessings come, he is the one making it happen. Let’s not give ourselves or anyone else one iota of the credit deserved by God.

In addition, because Jesus is Lord, there is no need for depression. He is the one working out his plans. When success and blessings do not appear to come, he is the one sovereignly shaking things out behind the scenes. There is no need to blame ourselves or any other created being. Jesus is sovereign, and he does what he wants with the affairs of men, angels, and demons.

Yes friends, let us not look at men and think more highly of them that we ought. Created beings do have some power and influence, but they have all-power and unchecked influence. We are the Lord’s people. We attend the Lord’s church. We have the Lord’s children. We are citizens of the Lord’s nation. We are suffering the Lord’s curse, and we are buffeted by the Lord’s devil, demons, and enemies.

Jesus is Lord. Jesus is sovereign. Jesus is the one at the “right hand of the power of God.” Jesus is the King of kings, he occupies the throne, and this is true truth.

via Don’t Believe the Fake Media — Unfathomable Grace

November 10, 2019 Afternoon Verse Of The Day

The Parousia

For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with His angels; and will then recompense every man according to his deeds. (16:27)

Parousia is a noun form of the Greek verb behind to come and is often used to refer to Christ’s second coming, of which this is the first mention in the New Testament.

A day of judgment is coming, Jesus reminded the disciples and the multitude. The Father “has given all judgment to the Son” (John 5:22), and when the Son of Man, who is also the Son of God, comes in the glory of His Father with His angels (an event further described in Matt. 24–25), He will then recompense every man according to his deeds. Christ’s holy angels are the instruments of His service and His judgment, and when He comes to earth again they will come with Him, to raise “those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life” and “those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment” (John 5:29).

That general truth had been proclaimed long before by the psalmist: “Thou dost recompense a man according to his work,” the psalmist declared (Ps. 62:12). It was also echoed by Paul in his letter to the church at Rome. In 2:5–8, he is specific:

But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, who will render to every man according to his deeds: to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life; but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation.

“Each one of us,” the apostle later wrote, “shall give account of himself to God” (Rom. 14:12). Matthew 25 records the Lord’s teaching about the judgment of the nations. They, too, will be judged by their works (vv. 31–46).

As the Lord reviews the life of each person who has ever lived, He will say, as it were, “There is a believer. I can tell by his works, because they are the product of My Holy Spirit. There is an unbeliever, as I can also tell by his works, because they are the product of the flesh.” It is not that works save, but that they are the product of salvation. James teaches that the only kind of faith that saves is the kind that results in righteous behavior (James 2:14–26; cf. Eph. 2:10).

Those whose works are pleasing to the Lord are those who, by God’s sovereign grace and power, have trusted in Christ as saving Lord, while denying self, taking up their crosses, and following Him. They will receive everlasting life and all the blessings of heaven. Those whose works are rejected by the Lord are those who put their hope and trust in the ephemeral things of this life. They will receive eternal damnation and all the torments of hell.

The call to salvation is a call to discipleship as described in this passage. When God saves, He produces this kind of follower.[1]


27 Not only Jesus’ example (v. 24; cf. 10:24–25) but the judgment he will exercise is an incentive to take up one’s cross and follow him. The Son of Man (see comments at 8:20; 16:13) will come “in his Father’s glory”—the same glory God his Father enjoys (cf. 26:64; Jn 17:1–5), another implicit claim to the status of deity—along with his angels, who both enhance his glory and serve as his agents for the eschatological ingathering (13:41; 24:31; 25:31–32; Lk 9:26). They are his angels. He stands so far above them that he owns them and uses them. At that time he will reward each person kata tēn praxin autou (“according to what he has done”). The language is that of Psalm 62:12, where Yahweh rewards his people, and the Yahweh-Jesus exchange is not uncommon. The use of praxis (“conduct,” “deeds,” GK 4552) is Matthew’s rendering of the Hebrew collective singular by a corresponding singular in Greek (Gundry, Use of the Old Testament, 138). For the concept of rewards, see comments at 5:12.[2]


27 The “for” which introduces this saying links this judgment scene with the disciple’s loyalty and martyrdom: it is worth remaining faithful even to the loss of earthly life because there is an ultimate judgment to come, and on the outcome of that judgment the enjoyment of true life will depend. In Dan 7:9–10 the judgment takes place at the throne of the Ancient of Days, surrounded by ten thousand times ten thousand angelic attendants; when the Son of Man “comes” to that courtroom scene it is as the one in whose favor judgment is given. But the result of that judgment is that he in his turn receives “dominion, glory and kingship” over all nations for ever (Dan 7:14), and so Jesus’ saying here merges the two roles, and he comes not to be judged but to judge. He thus shares “his Father’s glory,” and the angels who surround the throne of God become “his angels” (see p. 635, n. 4). There may also be an echo here of Zech 14:5, the vision of the eschatological “coming” of God “and all the holy ones with him.” Thus here, as in 25:31–34, Jesus speaks of his future glory as Son of Man in terms which merge his role and dignity with that of God himself. It then follows naturally that in v. 28 the “kingship” is ascribed not to God but to the Son of Man.

As judge, he will “repay every person according to what they have done.” The whole clause closely echoes Ps 62:12 (cf. Prov 24:12), which speaks of God’s universal judgment; again language appropriate to God himself is transferred to the glorified Son of Man. “Repay” is used for divine rewards in 6:4, 6, 18, and here too the primary emphasis in context is probably on the reward for loyalty even to the point of martyrdom, the reward which results in “finding one’s psychē.” But the term is no less applicable to punishment for disloyalty, and a judgment of every person “according to what they have done” must be expected to envisage either reward or punishment, as will be spelled out more fully in 25:31–46. This saying is thus not only an encouragement to the faithful, but also a warning to those whose loyalty may be wavering. “What they have done” is a broad term, but in the present context the focus is not on lifestyle in general, but on whether or not they have maintained their commitment to Jesus in the face of hostility. A more focused perspective on the basis of final judgment will be provided in 25:31–46, and we shall consider at that point how this prospect of judgment on the basis of “what they have done” relates to the Pauline doctrine of justification by grace through faith.[3]


16:27 For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory. Jesus alludes to Daniel 7:13–14 for a second time (see comments on 10:23). In Daniel 7:13–14 the picture is of “one like a son of man, coming on the clouds of heaven,” enthroned and given authority over all things for an everlasting kingdom. Jesus implicitly claims his future vindication by God. The same phrasing of “Son of Man” and “coming” (erchomai) is repeated in 16:28.

he will reward each person according to what they have done. In Matthew, Jesus frequently references final judgment, as he does here. In line with his use of Daniel 7, Jesus claims that he (“the Son of Man”) will be the one to judge all peoples. People’s actions will matter in that final day, as has already been emphasized at 7:24–27; 13:41–42 (also 25:31–46). For Matthew, this truth does not negate the reality of God’s grace and forgiveness in believers’ lives, since human covenant loyalty is always in response to the reality of God’s initiating covenant loyalty and grace.[4]


27. For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father, with his angels, and then shall he render to each according to his deeds. For “Son of man” see on 8:20. The Father will reward this Son of man, the One who from suffering attains to glory, in achieving salvation for his people. The Father will impart his own glory to him and give to him his own angels (cf. Dan. 7:10) to be his brilliant retinue (Matt. 25:31). The glory of the Son of man is revealed also in this very fact, that he will be the Judge who will render to each man according to his deeds.

Entrance into or exclusion from the new heaven and earth will depend on whether one is clothed with the righteousness of Christ. Apart from Christ there is no salvation at any time (Acts 4:12; cf. John 3:16; 14:6; 1 Cor. 3:11). Salvation is wholly by grace, through faith (Eph. 2:8).

Nevertheless, there will be degrees of punishment and also degrees of glory. Note the expression “many stripes … few stripes” (Luke 12:47, 48), and see also Dan. 12:3; 1 Cor. 3:12–14.

The degree of glory or of punishment will depend on two considerations:

  1. What amount of “light” (knowledge) has this person received? (Rom. 2:12).
  2. How has he used the light which he has received? (Luke 12:47, 48). Has he been faithful? And if so, in what measure? Has he been faithless? And if so, to what extent? This will be evident from his works. These works will show both whether or not a person is a genuine believer in Christ, and also to what extent he has used or abused the light which he received (Rev. 20:13; then 1 Cor. 3:12–14). Hence the passage under consideration says, “Then shall he render to each according to his deeds.”[5]

16:27. Jesus then explained the wisdom of following and accepting the suffering and loss implicit in following him. Using the title the Son of Man in eschatological, messianic sense, Jesus foretold the day when all the losses of his obedient followers would be abundantly compensated. In contrast to his first coming to earth in humility, the next coming would be in his Father’s glory with his angels. Now he has come as the sacrificial Son of Abraham; then he will come as the sovereign Son of David.

Although Jesus’ intention in the context of Matthew 16 was to give hope to his followers, the word reward does include the “repayment” or judgment of those works that do not honor Christ. Each person does not mean only those disciples who will be rewarded, but also those who seek the world and end up forfeiting their lives (Col. 3:23–25). Therefore, “repay” or “recompense” is a preferable translation over “reward.”

The repayment will be according to what he had done. Christ was seeking to motivate his followers to work hard and invest their lives for eternity. Scripture makes it very clear that there are differing degrees of reward for believers, based on their stewardship of life opportunities (Matt. 25:14–30; Rom. 2:6; 14:12; 1 Cor. 3:13; 2 Cor. 5:10; Eph. 6:8; Col. 3:23–25; Rev. 2:23; 20:12; 22:12). In 2 Timothy 2:10–13, the apostle Paul summed up the basis of the disciple’s reward as endurance.[6]


[1] MacArthur, J. F., Jr. (1985). Matthew (Vol. 3, p. 52). Chicago: Moody Press.

[2] Carson, D. A. (2010). Matthew. In T. Longman III & D. E. Garland (Eds.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Matthew–Mark (Revised Edition) (Vol. 9, p. 431). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[3] France, R. T. (2007). The Gospel of Matthew (pp. 639–640). Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publication Co.

[4] Brown, J. K. (2015). Matthew. (M. L. Strauss & J. H. Walton, Eds.) (p. 193). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.

[5] Hendriksen, W., & Kistemaker, S. J. (1953–2001). Exposition of the Gospel According to Matthew (Vol. 9, pp. 658–659). Grand Rapids: Baker Book House.

[6] Weber, S. K. (2000). Matthew (Vol. 1, p. 257). Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

OUTRAGEOUS! Democrats Refuse All GOP Requests for Witnesses in Their Sham Investigation – Say Republicans’ Requests Based on ‘Sham’ Claims — The Gateway Pundit

US Rep Devin Nunes, Ranking Republican on the House Intel Committee, provided a list of individuals that the Republicans would like to interview in the sham Democrat impeachment hearings.

The list includes Adam Schiff, who plotted with the whistleblower before he filed his complaint. The list also includes DNC operative Alexandra Chalupa who worked with the whistleblower Eric Ciaramella in 2016, the whistleblower Eric Ciaramella, Hunter Biden, Nellie Ohr and Ambassador Kurt Volker.

One requested witness is the corrupt son of the corrupt former Vice President Biden, Hunter Biden.

The Democrats have denied this request, calling it a ‘sham’.

As the Democrats move forward with their insane impeachment hearing in the House, the levels of insanity reach new levels.

The Democrats created an impeachment process where the individual leading the process was involved in creating it with a CIA spy who leaked information from a Presidential call.  The CIA spy was kicked out of the White House in 2017 for leaking.

The spy met with Adam Schiff and his team before filing his complaint under the Whistleblower statute although this didn’t meet the standards for such a complaint.  Whistleblower complaints are only legitimate in the Intel Community if related to a member of the Intel community.  The President was the subject of the complaint and he is not a member of the Intel community.

The whistleblower form in the Intel community was updated to allow for second hand information.  This was not allowed before this complaint.   The Inspector General (IG) of the Intel community is involved in the Russia witchhunt.  He worked in the DOJ and was involved in the fraudulent filings of FISA warrants.  He then moved to his IG position and allowed for the complaint from a CIA spy who was kicked out of the White House for leaking.

Schiff and his team flew to the Ukraine before the complaint and met with some of the individuals who testified in Schiff’s court held in the basement of the US capital.  The Republicans are not allowed to bring in witnesses.  The witnesses are coached by Schiff.  The Republicans’ questions are constantly interrupted by the likes of ‘President’ Swalwell, a failed Democrat candidate for President, and other Democrats.

The President and his team was not allowed to interview the witnesses.  The witnesses are basing their testimonies in some cases on 4th hand information.

Schiff is in charge of the impeachment hearings set up based on the CIA spy’s complaint.   Schiff is the same individual who created the incident that the impeachment is based on.  All rules and guidelines are created by him alone.  He decides who interviews and when and what they are allowed to say.  He tells witnesses whether they are allowed to answer questions or not from the Republicans on the Committee.

The whole SHAM is based on the President requesting the new President from the Ukraine to look into the 2016 campaign.  The President asked that Ukraine leader see if he could find anything on Hillary’s server, which some people believe may be in the Ukraine, as well as Crowdstrike, the Ukrainian owned firm that the FBI and DNC relied upon in 2016 when it claimed that Russians hacked Hillary’s emails.  Crowdstrike’s claim to this day is the only information used by the FBI, DOJ and Mueller team as evidence that the Russians hacked Hillary’s emails.

The US has a treaty with the Ukraine that allows for the US and the Ukraine to assist each other with criminal investigations.  Based on a Mutual Legal Assistant Treaty with the Ukraine, the President had every right and even a duty to dig into criminal activities in the Ukraine that involve Americans.

The President of the Ukraine asked on the call whether he should look into the Bidens’ actions in the Ukraine.  A video where the former Vice President bragged about having a Ukrainian prosecutor kicked off a case where he was investigating his son, Hunter Biden, was shared all over the Internet.  The judge was removed in a quid pro quo arrangement.  The Ukrainians removed the prosecutor and then they received $1 billion from the US.

Biden’s son Hunter, was placed on the Board of Burisma Holdings in the Ukraine and he and Devon Archer, who’s connected to former Secretary of State, John Kerry, who was also on the Burisma Board, made $50,000 a month each in spite of knowing nothing about Burisma’s business.

The Republicans on the Intel Committee want to interview these two young Burisma Board members. These two were included in the list of nine individuals currently on the Republican’s list.  Below is the letter to Adam Schiff requesting these testimonies –

Per news late Sunday night, in less that 24 hours, the Head of the Impeachment sham, Shifty Adam Schiff had already denied the Republican’s request saying it won’t probe “sham claims” –

In response [to Nunes’ memo], Schiff confirmed that Biden will not be testifying but agreed to review the rest of the Republicans’ list. “This inquiry is not and will not serve as a vehicle to undertake the same sham investigations into the Bidens or 2016 that the President pressed Ukraine to conduct for his personal political benefit,” the top Democrat said, according to The Washington Post, “or facilitate the President’s effort to threaten, intimidate, and retaliate against the whistleblower who courageously raised the initial alarm.”

Americans know that Obama and the Bidens were corrupt.  The entire Obama Administration was corrupt.  The Obama Administration was a pay-for-play enterprise.  Everyone wanting to see or do business with the Obama Administration, with Obama, Hillary, Biden, Kerry and more, had to pay.  This is what this is all about.  This is why America voted for Trump!

The Democrats are making up a sham investigation not based on the law that they think they can get away with.  We, the American people, won’t let them!

via OUTRAGEOUS! Democrats Refuse All GOP Requests for Witnesses in Their Sham Investigation – Say Republicans’ Requests Based on ‘Sham’ Claims — The Gateway Pundit

Rep. McCarthy: This is a calculated coup orchestrated by Adam Schiff | Fox News

GOP releases impeachment probe witness list; House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy weighs in.

https://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=6102324163001&w=466&h=263Watch the latest video at foxnews.com

Source: Rep. McCarthy: This is a calculated coup orchestrated by Adam Schiff

Video: Tucker Carlson Exposes Obama Judge Who Is Totally Screwing Roger Stone | DC Dirty Laundry

POSTED BY: DEAN JAMES

Two things are patently obvious in the federal government’s case against long-time GOP operative Roger Stone: 1) He’s going to be convicted of “lying to Congress,” and 2) he’ll spend the rest of his life in jail, without a pardon from President Trump.

Tucker Carlson make that very clear without really saying those words during his Wednesday evening program, as he ticked off one example after another about how the system is so stacked against Stone there’s no way he’s going to get a fair trial.

The biggest reason why is the federal judge overseeing the case: Obama appointee Amy Berman Jackson, who is blatantly biased against Stone and against President Trump to the point where she doesn’t even try to hide it.

Because she doesn’t have to. After all, she’s got a lifetime appointment to the federal bench — and when was the last time Congress impeached a federal judge for misconduct and bias?

Never.

From eye-rolling at Stone to approving jurors who have massive conflicts of interest and who have vocalized in her court how much they despise the president, it’s clear that Stone — a long-time political adviser to the president — will never get a fair trial.

Not in the deep blue haven of D.C., where the Garbage Party rules with an iron fist and no approval of the president is either permissible or tolerated.

So he’s going to be convicted of lying to Congress, Carlson noted with sarcasm, adding that lawmakers face no such legal jeopardy when they lie their tails off to the American people.

“What ought to be automatically disqualifying is Amy Berman Jackson’s behavior from the bench,” Carlson noted.

“No fair-minded person could condone it. If there were still honest liberals left in this country, they would be protesting outside the courtroom,” he added.

Watch:

More Tucker…

This article originally appeared at The National Sentinel and was republished with permission.

Source: Video: Tucker Carlson Exposes Obama Judge Who Is Totally Screwing Roger Stone

Rand Paul: Trump has “every right” to use quid pro quo with Ukraine | Axios

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” Sunday that he thinks it’s a mistake for the White House to argue there was no quid pro quo with Ukraine to investigate President Trump’s political rivals, and that Trump has “every right” to condition military aid on fighting corruption.


“I think we’ve gotten lost in this whole idea of quid pro quo. … If you’re not allowed to give aid to people who are corrupt — there’s always contingencies on aid. … Presidents since the beginning of time have resisted Congress, and there’s been this sort of back and forth jockeying over what is sent. But also presidents have withheld aid before for corruption. I think it’s a mistake to say, ‘Oh, he withheld aid until he got what he wanted.’ Well, if it’s corruption and he believes there to be corruption, he has every right to withhold aid.”
Rand Paul

Why it matters: Paul will act as a juror in the Senate trial in the likely event that Trump is impeached by the House. His argument that there’s nothing wrong with using military aid as leverage to push Ukraine to carry out investigations is one of several shifting strategies that defenders of the president have deployed.

  • Democrats counter that Trump has displayed no interest in fighting “corruption,” as Paul argues, and that the investigations he wanted Ukraine to pursue specifically concerned the president’s domestic political rivals — Joe Biden and the Democratic National Committee.
  • Bloomberg also reported on Saturday that the State Department “quietly authorized” the release of $141 million of the aid to Ukraine after lawyers found that the White House had no legal standing to block the funds, which had been appropriated by Congress.

Worth noting: Paul told NBC’s Chuck Todd that he opposes aid to Ukraine altogether. “I wouldn’t give them the aid because we don’t have the money,” the senator said. “We have to actually borrow the money from China to send it to Ukraine, so I’m against the aid and I think it’s a mistake to do the aid so I wouldn’t have played any of these games.”

Go deeper: The GOP’s war over naming the Ukraine whistleblower

Source: Rand Paul: Trump has “every right” to use quid pro quo with Ukraine

Schiff Rejects GOP Whistleblower Testimony Demand, Due To “The President’s Threats” | ZeroHedge News

In the least-surprising news item of the day, House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff has rejected GOP calls for the so-called whistleblower to testify in the sham impeachment hearings.

Schiff explains in a letter to Rep. Devin Nunes that the whistleblower’s testimony is “redundant and unnecessary,” claiming that the impeachment inquiry has gathered evidence that “not only confirms, but far exceeds” information in the original complaint.

Schiff also made it clear that the impeachment inquiry will not be used to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden, or allegations of Ukrainian meddling in the 2016 U.S. presidential elections.

Schiff’s stunningly hypocritical response to Nunes is below:

Dear Ranking Member Nunes:

The Committee is in receipt of your letter, dated today, proposing witnesses for the impeachment inquiry’s open hearings. The Committee is carefully evaluating the witness list you provided, along with the written justifications you included.

Consistent with H. Res. 660 and as noted in my November 6, 2019 letter, the Committee will give due consideration to witnesses within the scope of the impeachment inquiry.

In doing so, the Committee is mindful that this inquiry is a solemn undertaking, enshrined by the Founders in the Constitution, to determine whether the President of the United States warrants impeachment by the House of Representatives.

As we move to open hearings, it is important to underscore that the impeachment inquiry, and the Committee, will not serve as vehicles for any Member to carry out the same sham investigations into the Bidens or debunked conspiracies about 2016 U.S. election interference that President Trump pressed Ukraine to conduct for his personal political benefit.

The Committee also will not facilitate efforts by President Trump and his allies in Congress to threaten, intimidate, and retaliate against the whistleblower who courageously raised the initial alarm. It remains the duty of the Intelligence Committee to protect whistleblowers, and until recently, this was a bipartisan priority. The whistleblower has a right under laws championed by this Committee to remain anonymous and to be protected from harm.

The impeachment inquiry, moreover, has gathered an ever-growing body of evidence – from witnesses and documents, including the President’s own words in his July 25 call record – that not only confirms, but far exceeds, the initial information in the whistleblower’s complaint.

The whistleblower’s testimony is therefore redundant and unnecessary.

In light of the President’s threats, the individual’s appearance before us would only place their personal safety at grave risk.

As a reminder, Schiff initially said the whistleblower would testify to Congress but backed away after the contact between the person and his team was revealed.

This latest decision comes after Nunes complained that Democrats had yet to treat President Trump with “fairness” in the impeachment process, directing witnesses not to answer questions from GOP committee members and withholding transcripts.

In addition to the whistleblower, Republicans also requested the following witnesses:

  • Hunter Biden: The son of former Vice President Joe Biden, and a former board member for Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian gas company that has been plagued for years by corruption concerns. President Donald Trump asked Ukraine’s president in a July 25 phone call to consider investigating whether Joe Biden pressured the Ukrainian government in 2016 to shut down an investigation of Burisma.
  • Devon Archer: One of Hunter Biden’s business partners and a former Burisma board member.
  • Alexandra Chalupa: A former DNC consultant who met with Ukrainian embassy officials during the 2016 presidential campaign. Chalupa, who is Ukrainian-American, dug up dirt on Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort.
  • David Hale: The undersecretary of state for political affairs. Hale testified in a closed-door deposition Wednesday.
  • Tim Morrison: The former senior director for European and Eurasian affairs on the National Security Council. Morrison is one of only two individuals, including National Security Council’s Ukraine director, Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, to have listened to the July 25 phone call between Trump and Zelensky. Morrison testified that he did not hear anything illegal on the call, while Zelensky, who will be called to testify by Democrats, said that he had serious concerns with what Trump said in the call.
  • Nellie Ohr: The wife of Justice Department official Bruce Ohr, and a former contractor for Fusion GPS. Ohr told Congress in an Oct. 19, 2018, interview that Serhiy Leshchenko, a former Ukrainian lawmaker and investigative journalist, was a source of information for Fusion GPS, which peddled the infamous Steele dossier. Leshchenko, who has acknowledged having contact with Chalupa, helped publish information in August 2016 that led to Manafort’s firing as Trump campaign chairman.
  • Kurt Volker: The former special envoy to Ukraine. Volker was a liaison between Rudy Giuliani and the Zelensky administration. He testified Oct. 3 that he did not witness a Trump quid pro quo to Ukraine.

What are the odds that any of these people will be allowed by Schiff?

Source: Schiff Rejects GOP Whistleblower Testimony Demand, Due To “The President’s Threats”

Judge Jeanine Pirro of Fox News Delivers Blunt ‘Primers’ to Trump-Hating Democrats | LifeZette

On her Fox News program on Saturday night, “Justice with Judge Jeanine,” host Jeanine Pirro minced no words about the blatant and partisan “witch hunt” that’s occurring right now against President Donald Trump, fueled by House Democrats’ dislike of their political opponent and the attention they’re paying to the so-called Ukraine phone call whistleblower.

Public hearings on the impeachment inquiry are set to begin this coming Wednesday.

But Pirro talked about the deep hate by the deep state for Trump — which began to emerge just days after the president was inaugurated back in January 2017.

She also said Congress will “take any complaint” that emerges from almost anyone, in order to go after the commander-in-chief.

And she called out Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) — who tried to run for the 2020 Democratic nomination and failed, after polling at zero — for some of his recent commentary.

“It’s an abuse of power,” claimed Swalwell on CNN’s “New Day” last week, “to remove an ambassador for political reasons if you don’t like what they’re doing period.”

“Hey, Swalwell, a primer,” said Pirro after playing a clip of that comment by him. “You’re still polling at zero!”

“Another primer,” she added. “The president of the United States can get rid of an ambassador, just like the president had the right to the get rid of [former FBI Director] Jim Comey, just like [former President] Bill Clinton had the right when he cleared out the U.S. attorneys from the Department of Justice? Don’t you remember your hero Obama saying ‘elections have consequences’? Or are you a special kinds of stupid?” said Pirro.

Here’s more of her commentary.

“Now, I don’t want to get into all of this because nobody really cares,” she said.

“But this State Department guy George Kent — he says the president demanded that [the] Ukraine president investigate the 2016 election. Then he says he has no firsthand knowledge of this evidence. To me, cancel him out!”

“Then he said Rudy [Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer,] didn’t like the way he talked about [former ambassador to Ukraine] Marie Yovanovich. So what? Cancel him out.”

“They all say the president is undermining the rule of law. What rule of law are they talking about?”

“Here’s yet another primer. Whenever the federal government gives you money, they make a demand in return. It’s called a quid pro quo with politics, but it’s not illegal and it’s not impeachable,” said Pirro.

Related: Judge Jeanine Pirro Delivers This Truth About President Trump

“If you are a city, town, village, state, or even a local D.A., like me, and you ask the federal government for money, they will require that in exchange for that money, you do and prove that you did X, Y and Z.”

“The United States government does not give money because they’re nice guys. They give money because they want something in return. It’s never a gift.”

“So, what do we have here?” she continued.

“We have a wannabe whistleblower motivated by his hate for the president, along with his attorney … What information puts this alleged whistleblower at risk? We’re entitled to know what motivates them and what information did he reveal that puts him at risk.”

“And was his hearsay second-, third- or fourth-hand? Did [Rep. Adam] Schiff [D-Calif.] provide a lawyer for him? Is he an agent of the coup? What brought this person to us? Why was he even in the White House?”

“The statute, by the way,” added Judge Jeanine, “does not give the whistleblower anonymity. But everyone wants to protect [him].”

“Everyone,” she said, wants to go “along with the Schiff narrative so we don’t get to find out what this person’s role was or how long he was being groomed [for this role]. In the end, none of this matters or rises to the level of an impeachable offense.”

Related: White House Releases Transcript of July 25 Phone Call

“I still want to know what quid pro quo Barack Obama got,” she added.

“I still want to know what Barack Obama was promising [Vladimir] Putin to [Dmitri] Medvedev [who was then the Russian president] and the hot-mic moment that he could do [something] after the election.”

“If you don’t like the president’s policy, vote for somebody else,” said Pirro.

“In the meantime, let the president do the job we elected him to do.”

See this video — and share your thoughts.

Source: Judge Jeanine Pirro of Fox News Delivers Blunt ‘Primers’ to Trump-Hating Democrats