ELDER PATRIOT – My good friend former Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo penned a warning to Donald Trump that appeared on Breitbart.com earlier today.  Tancredo asks, “Would the Republican establishment use impeachment to block Trump’s agenda?”

Tancredo points out that, while the President-elect ‘s transition teams at the EPA, State Department and Education Department are busy mapping ambitious changes in direction, Congress’s Republican leadership is busy doubling down on dissonance and disloyalty.

  • Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell announced this week he will oppose Trump’s tax reforms.
  • Senator Lindsey Graham is joining Democrats in sponsoring new legislation to protect the “Dreamers” from deportation after their unlawfully granted legal status and work permits expire.
  • Senator Susan Collins will oppose any restrictions on Muslim refugees, no matter how weak and inadequate the vetting to weed out jihadists.
  • Senator Lamar Alexander aims to protect major parts of Obamacare, despite five years of voluminous Republican promises to “repeal and replace” it if they ever had the power to do so.

And then, on the House side, we have the naysayer-in-chief, Speaker Paul Ryan, who refused to campaign with Donald Trump in Wisconsin, and who has vowed to obstruct Trump’s most important and most popular campaign promise — an end to open borders and vigorous immigration law enforcement.”

Tom and I agree that the establishment will do anything to derail Trump’s America First agenda that is in conflict with their globalist plans.  But, Tom and I disagree on how they’ll take neuter Trump.

The former congressman concludes his article, Donald Trump won a electoral mandate to change direction and put American interests first, beginning with border security. If the congressional Republican establishment chooses to block the implementation of that electoral mandate, it would destroy not only Trump’s agenda, it would destroy the Republican Party.”

And this is why I depart company with Tom on the methodology they’ll use to stop Trump.  The Washington establishment has spent tens of billions of dollars over the last century building a Left-Right paradigm that has allowed them to divide the electorate in advancement of their anti-American agenda.  They will not throw that away by impeaching an increasingly popular president that Tom correctly notes would result in a Republican revolt of the rank and file and destroy the party.

Tom echoes a warning that I wrote to Trump even before he did that, “Several months ago I was asked what advice I would give to the Trump campaign.

I said, only half joking, that he had better pick a vice presidential candidate the establishment hates more than it hates him.”

Trump failed to heed that warning and the acceptability of Mike Pence to the elites presents a very real possibility of a Trump assassination.

Tom, I wish I could agree with you that they’d settle for impeachment and the destruction of the Republican Party.  Then, at least the people would be moved to make some changes to the elected elites who have taken them for granted for so long.  But Washington Republicans won’t opt for their own destruction. 

No, they will choose to have their cake and to eat it too just as they did with a previous president who threatened the establishment plan for a global government, John Kennedy.

It would be naïve to think that assassination isn’t the option they are now weighing.  If you think a single life matters to these people you couldn’t be more wrong.  Ask yourself how many police officers have been sacrificed so that Black Lives Matter is given a wide berth with which to divide us?  Or, ask the elites how they sleep at night after having spent us trillions of dollars into debt funding the deployment of our young men and women to their deaths and dismemberment over the past thirteen years in a war that long ago lost it’s justification if it ever had one and that they have no intention of winning?

Republican leadership has already remained silent while literally thousands of calls for Trump’s assassination have come from the unhappy Hillary supporters.  If it’s not to create a plausible explanation to cover for a CIA “hit” then why the silence?  Remember, it’s only a conspiracy theory until it happens, right?

Trump knows this.  This is why those in the know recognize that he has more courage in one pinky than all the smug politicos in Washington combined.  America chose the right man to drain the swamp if only we can keep him alive.

HERE IS A LIST OF EVERY SINGLE TIME OBAMA COMMITTED AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE THAT DEMS & MEDIA COVERED UP “Impeach!” It’s been more than eight years since Democrats uttered that word – long enough for anyone to wonder if it was still in their vocabulary, considering the deafening silence through the dozens of serious scandals during President Obama’s administration – but now that President Trump is the man in the White House, it’s back with a vengeance. . . Democrats everywhere are wildly slinging the “I” word, hoping to nail Trump for high crimes and misdemeanors after the New York Times claimed a memo written by former FBI Director James Comey said the president urged him to end the federal investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn. . . Some members of Congress are getting in on the action. They include Reps. Maxine Water, D-Calif., and Al Green, D-Texas. Even a Republican, Rep. Justin Amash, claimed Wednesday there are grounds to impeach President Trump. House Oversign Committee Chair Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, asked for the alleged Comey memo and other documents. Chaffetz tweeted that he is prepared to subpoena the information. And Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., invoked “Watergate.” . . Now the Democratic Party is reportedly poll testing impeachment as a 2018 election issue. More than 1 million people signed a petition calling on Congress to impeach Trump. . . Wasting no time Wednesday, the mainstream media sprang into action, enthusiastically echoing the left’s impeachment calls. MSNBC launched a Watergate ad implying Trump is America’s new Richard Nixon. . . “Watergate. We know its name because there were reporters who never stopped asking questions,” says MSNBC host Chris Hayes, who hinted that Trump is next on the impeachment chopping block. “Now, who knows where the questions will take us. But I know this: I’m not going to stop asking them.” . . Meanwhile, some overzealous members of the left plastered fliers around Washington, D.C., demanding all White House staffers resign Wednesday. . . The posters read: “If you work for this White House you are complicit in hate-mongering, lies, corrupt taking of Americans’ tax money via self-dealing and emoluments, and quite possibly federal crimes and treason. Also, any wars will be on your soul. … Resign now.” . . But constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley, who voted for President Obama, warned “impeachment” enthusiasts not to get ahead of themselves with President Trump. Why? . . At this time, there’s no evidence Trump actually committed a crime. . . “The criminal code demands more than what Comey reportedly describes in his memo,” Turley wrote in a May 17 opinion piece posted at the Hill. Turley explained: . . For the first time, the Comey memo pushes the litany of controversies surrounding Trump into the scope of the United States criminal code. . . However, if this is food for obstruction of justice, it is still an awfully thin soup. Some commentators seem to be alleging criminal conduct in office or calling for impeachment before Trump completed the words of his inaugural oath of office. Not surprising, within minutes of the New York Times report, the response was a chorus of breathless “gotcha” announcements. But this memo is neither the Pentagon Papers nor the Watergate tapes. Indeed, it raises as many questions for Comey as it does Trump in terms of the alleged underlying conduct. . . A good place to start would be with the federal law, specifically 18 U.S.C. 1503. The criminal code demands more than what Comey reportedly describes in his memo. There are dozens of different variations of obstruction charges ranging from threatening witnesses to influencing jurors. None would fit this case. That leaves the omnibus provision on attempts to interfere with the “due administration of justice.” . . However, that still leaves the need to show that the effort was to influence “corruptly” when Trump could say that he did little but express concern for a longtime associate. The term “corruptly” is actually defined differently under the various obstruction provisions, but it often involves a showing that someone acted “with the intent to secure an unlawful benefit for oneself or another.” Encouraging leniency or advocating for an associate is improper but not necessarily seeking an unlawful benefit for him. . . -Obama’s Iran nuke deal -Obama knew about Hillary’s private email server -Obama IRS targets conservatives -Obama’s DOJ spies on AP reporters -Obamacare & Obama’s false promises -Illegal-alien amnesty by executive order -Benghazi-gate -Operation Fast & Furious -5 Taliban leaders for Bergdahl -Extortion 17 -‘Recess ‘ appointments – when Senate was in session -Appointment of ‘czars’ without Senate approval -Suing Arizona for enforcing federal law -Refusal to defend Defense of Marriage Act -Illegally conducting war against Libya -NSA: Spying on Americans -Muslim Brotherhood ties -Miriam Carey -Birth certificate -Executive orders -Solyndra and the lost $535 million -Egypt -Cap & Trade: When in doubt, bypass Congress -Refusal to prosecute New Black Panthers -Obama’s U.S. citizen ‘hit list’