Why Feinstein is not “too upset” at the Joe and Hunter Biden play in Ukraine…

df-uspsIn response to my email to my Senators, I received this response from the corrupt, stupid, and blind Dianne Feinstein…


Dear Stephen:

Thank you for contacting me regarding your opposition to the impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump. I appreciate the time you took to write, and I welcome the opportunity to respond.

On December 17, 2019, the House of Representatives voted to approve two articles of impeachment. The first article charges President Trump with abuse of power for pressuring Ukraine to announce investigations into his political rivals.

[OCS: It appears that DiFi is delusional.

One, the fact that the former Vice President, Joe Biden, is running for office does not render him immune from investigation into self-described and recorded strong-arm tactics in demanding that the President of a foreign country remove a State Prosecutor from office nor does it prevent him from being held responsible for his actions.

Two, Ukraine was investigating Burisma, a corrupt Ukrainian gas company that employed Biden’s son Hunter before the telephone call which allegedly triggered impeachment proceedings. I say alleged because the House Democrats announced that they were going to impeach the President prior to the inauguration and all through the first three years of his administration. The House Democrats never deposed the so-called whistleblower and the deposition of the Intelligence Community Inspector General remains classified and beyond the reach of the public.

Three, it appears Ukraine did not take any action prior to or subsequent to the phone call, which the so-called whistleblower mischaracterized to the point of creating a fictitious account that never happened.]

The second article charges the President with obstruction of Congress for preventing the House from securing witness testimony and documents in the impeachment inquiry.

[OCS: Exerting privilege with respect to testimony of Presidential confidants or withholding privileged documents is not an impeachable offense. Neither is seeking judicial review of subpoenas. In the case of two high-level officials, it appears that the Democrats withdrew their subpoenas to avoid a court battle.]

Only three presidents in the history of the United States have been impeached, and the Constitution requires the Senate to now conduct a fair and impartial impeachment trial overseen by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. If at least two-thirds of Senators find the President guilty, the President will be removed from office.

[OCS: There is nothing fair or impartial when the matter is hyper-partisan and individual members are held responsible to the party for their vote. Can you say mass witness tampering?]

Considering articles of impeachment is a solemn responsibility. When impeachment trials begin, every Senator swears an oath to “do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws.” That oath requires each one of us to objectively review the information presented and make an informed judgment.

[OCS: There is nothing fair or impartial about this trial since one party, the President, was denied due process and not allowed to call rebuttal witnesses. And nearly half of the Senators who sit in judgement are not impartial and have already announced that the “evidence” is overwhelming and they will be supporting the removal process.]

Importantly, the House collected a significant amount of evidence during its inquiry. However, several key witnesses were prevented from testifying, and important documents were withheld by the White House.

[OCS: The truth is that the House minority was prevented from executing their committee duties, the House majority appears complicit in witness tampering and subornation of perjury. The House does not have an unlimited right to witnesses and documents under the separation of powers doctrine and claimed privilege.]

This evidence should be available to the Senate as part of a fair and complete trial. That is why I have called on my Senate colleagues to join me in supporting Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s request for key documents and specific witnesses, all of whom have firsthand knowledge of these events.

[OCS: It the House Majority found the evidence so overwhelming and compelling that the voted to impeach the President, nothing further should be needed. To the extent they need additional evidence, points to a failure to make their case.]

You may find a copy of my letter here:

I will be sure to keep your thoughts in mind as the Senate considers the articles of impeachment again President Trump. I will also continue my work in the Senate to fight hard for the priorities of Californians, advance legislation that will help all Americans, and oppose policies that would do harm to our state and our nation.

Once again, thank you for writing.  Should you have any other questions or comments, please call my Washington, D.C., office at (202) 224-3841 or visit my website at You can also follow me online at YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter, and you can sign up for my email newsletter at

Best regards.

Sincerely yours,
  Dianne Feinstein
         United States Senator

Bottom line …

Ask yourself why House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff refuses to call the so-called whistleblower, identified in the media as Eric Ciaramella, before the committee or release the interview with the Intelligence Community Inspector General who processed the defective complaint with a false narrative?

Ask yourself, why both Chairman Schiff and Chairman Jerome Nadler, Chair of the House Judiciary Committee, now declare that the whistleblower’s testimony is unneeded and irrelevant since President Trump declassified the transcript of the telephone call that was the subject of the whistleblower’s complaint to the Intelligence Community Inspector General?  Even though the whistleblower’s second-hand account was grossly inaccurate and the Inspector General backdated forms that removed the requirement for “first-hand” knowledge? Or why the whistleblower apparently perjured himself by not indicating contact with Adam Schiff’s committee prior to filing the complaint? Or the extent to which Adam Schiff may have suborned perjury or engaged in witness tampering?

Ask yourself, why Adam Schiff is not a fact witness in this matter considering he hired a close National Security Council colleague of the whistleblower who likely discussed the matter before bringing it to the committee? Exploring if the Schiff committee staffer and the whistleblower had a conversation months prior to any complaint discussing how to get Trump out of office?

Ask yourself, what is the relationship between Joseph Biden, Burisma Holdings, and all of the Ukrainians the whistleblower checked into the Obama White House to discuss Ukrainian corruption, Burisma Holdings, and the complications of Hunter Biden sitting as a Burisma board member on January 19, 2016?

Biden is the real scandal – and should be front and center in any impeachment proceeding. Only the Inspector General must maintain confidentiality about the whistleblower’s identity. There are no such protections when it comes to Congress, the media, or any other executive branch agencies. If the whistleblower has anything to fear, it is those who would be implicated and those who are likely to prosecute him if the facts are revealed.

There are no such protections when it comes to Congress, the media, or any other executive branch agencies. If the whistleblower has anything to fear, it is those who would be implicated and those who are likely to prosecute him if the facts are revealed.

There is little doubt in my mind that Diane Feinstein is one of the most corrupt, self-serving members of Congress and her machinations over the years deserve further investigation and prosecution. Of course, she has every reason to resist examining the diversion of the impeachment hearing.

We are so screwed.

-- steve

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS