{"id":533,"date":"2019-10-30T17:40:18","date_gmt":"2019-10-30T21:40:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/rheagop.org\/?p=533"},"modified":"2019-10-30T17:40:18","modified_gmt":"2019-10-30T21:40:18","slug":"the-rhea-county-republican-november-2019","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/rheagop.org\/the-rhea-county-republican-november-2019\/","title":{"rendered":"The Rhea County Republican – November 2019"},"content":{"rendered":"

RHEA COUNTY REPUBLICAN<\/span><\/h1>\n

ADVANCING THE CONSERVATIVE CAUSE<\/span><\/h3>\n

Vol. 3 \u2013 No. 9\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 November 2019<\/p>\n

<\/em><\/p>\n

RHEA COUNTY REPUBLICAN PARTY EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE<\/strong><\/p>\n

Bitsy Gryder \u2013 Chairman\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Gary Drinkard \u2013 Vice Chairman
\nLaura Travis \u2013 Secretary\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Larry Pendergrass \u2013 Treasurer
\nLinda Pendergrass \u2013 Vice Treasurer<\/p>\n

MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING<\/strong><\/p>\n

The next meeting of the Rhea County Republican Party will be held on 7 November, at 7:00 PM, at the Rhea County Sheriff\u2019s Training Center, 711 Eagle Drive, Evensville, TN.\u00a0 (Bring a friend.)<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

HAPPY THANKSGIVING TO ONE AND ALL!<\/strong><\/p>\n

Each year, all across the United States, on the 4th<\/sup> Thursday of November, we celebrate a national holiday that has come to be known as \u201cThanksgiving.\u201d<\/p>\n

The first such event took place in 1621, at Plymouth colony, in what is now known as the State of Massachusetts, when the Pilgrims took time off from their labors to celebrate and share with their indigenous neighbors a \u201cHarvest Celebration.\u201d\u00a0 The exact date(s) of what was then a three-day celebration are unknown.<\/p>\n

In all, the 53 Pilgrims who hosted the gathering were all who remained of the original 102 passengers who sailed across the Atlantic on the Mayflower.<\/p>\n

Guests at the feast included 90 Wampanoag Indians, led by their Chief, Massasoit.\u00a0 One of these Indians included a young man named Squanto, the only one of the Wampanoag Indians who spoke fluent English, who served as the interpreter.<\/p>\n

Over the years, the Harvest Celebration became combined with a July event held by the Pilgrims which was known as \u201cThanksgiving.\u201d\u00a0 The latter term became that which marks the holiday we celebrate today.<\/p>\n

This brief account is derived from the works of Rebecca Beatrice Brooks, a writer and publisher of the History of Massachusetts Blog. Rebecca is a freelance writer who got her start in journalism working for small-town newspapers in Massachusetts and New Hampshire after she graduated from the University of New Hampshire with a B.A. in journalism.\u00a0 More information can be found at the following link: https:\/\/historyofmassachusetts.org\/the-first-thanksgiving\/<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

EDITORIAL<\/strong><\/p>\n

I\u2019ve given more than a little thought toward understanding the shenanigans of the Democrats with their \u201cimpeachment inquiry\u201d and I presume you have, too.<\/p>\n

While their antics remind us of \u201cKabuki Theatre,\u201d a theatrical style known for its elaborate costumes and over-acting, their ultimate goal is to achieve a political coup that will remove President Donald John Trump from the White House!\u00a0 Not because he has done anything wrong; the actions of the Democrats are based solely on the fact that their side lost and they refuse to accept the reality of their loss.<\/p>\n

Some people might also be curious about the terminology the Democrats are using in their latest ploy \u2013 \u201cimpeachment inquiry<\/em>\u201d as opposed to an \u201cimpeachment investigation<\/em>.\u201d\u00a0 What\u2019s the difference?\u00a0 Much!<\/p>\n

An investigation<\/em> is a formal process<\/em> undertaken by Congress and, in accordance with its rules, must be conducted by a bipartisan group (a formal Committee).<\/p>\n

Launching a congressional investigation<\/em> requires that a vote be taken to authorize such, and the purpose and parameters of the investigation<\/em> must be specified prior to taking the vote.<\/p>\n

If a majority of the Members of the House of Representatives vote for<\/em> an investigation<\/em> the Speaker then assigns Representatives from his\/her Party to staff the Committee, and the House Minority Leader appoints an equal number from his\/her Party, minus one, to serve on the Committee.\u00a0 During the investigation<\/em>, all evidence and all depositions are reviewed by all<\/em> the Members of the investigative Committee.<\/p>\n

The Committee would present its findings to the Speaker and, if indicated by the Committee, the Speaker would take a vote among the body of the House of Representatives on whether to refer their findings to the Senate, wherein a formal trial would be held.\u00a0 If a two-thirds majority of the Senate supported the referral made by the Speaker, the parties named in the referral would be impeached.<\/p>\n

An inquiry<\/em> is quite a different matter; inquiries<\/em> are not necessarily a formal function of Congress; inquiries<\/em> may be conducted by inquirers appointed by the Speaker, and do not<\/em> require that the Speaker share any data or depositions (evidence<\/em> in this case) gathered by those assigned to conduct the inquiry<\/em>.\u00a0 An inquiry<\/em> can be conducted without first having a vote to decide whether such an action has merit.<\/p>\n

So, Nancy Pelosi\u2019s inquiry<\/em> is being conducted by her selected appointees, and their mission is to gather claims of unspecified \u201cwrong doings\u201d (insinuated to be \u201chigh crimes and misdemeanors\u201d).\u00a0 As long as these claims are a part of an inquiry<\/em>, none of the claims need to be supported by evidence.<\/p>\n

There are no limitations for how long an inquiry<\/em> may be carried out.\u00a0 Speaker Pelosi\u2019s \u201cimpeachment inquiry\u201d has, in one manner or another, been ongoing for nearly three years.\u00a0 During that time, the Speaker and her operatives have leaked copious amounts of information, much of it untrue \u2013 anything that might be harmful to President Trump \u2013 to their media operatives, and they have remained silent on, or tried to suppress, any evidence that might exonerate the President or that does not support their narrative.\u00a0 In doing so, driven mainly by their pathological obsession to disagree for the sake of disagreeing, the Democrats have engaged in what can only be defined as a many-faceted political coup!<\/p>\n

The fact is, an impeachment process<\/em> would require the formal initiation of an impeachment investigation<\/em> by the Speaker, and the Democrats most definitely do not<\/em> want their efforts to be defined in such a manner.\u00a0 To do so would require that the accusers disclose any and all evidence \u2013 including the names of accusers and witnesses and their recorded depositions \u2013 to those who would defend the accused, in this case President Trump.\u00a0 At the conclusion of her impeachment investigation<\/em> Speaker Pelosi would have to take a vote to see whether a majority of House Members wanted to refer the matter for a trial in the Senate.\u00a0 Instead, the Democrats want to run out the clock until the 2020 election is over.<\/p>\n

Given their dismal field of candidates vying for the Democrat nomination to run against President Trump, and the fact they have ZERO ideas for their platform that could possibly get them elected, it becomes easy to understand their desperation.<\/p>\n

Furthermore, during an impeachment investigation,<\/em> the accused \u2013 our President \u2013 would have rights under the 4th<\/sup> Amendment, namely \u201cto be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures\u201d unless a warrant has been issued based on probable cause.\u00a0 I have seen no<\/em> justifiable \u201cprobable cause\u201d for all the data the Democrats have demanded!<\/p>\n

Next to consider is the matter of protection under the 6th<\/sup> Amendment:\u00a0 \u201cThe accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy trial, by an impartial<\/em> jury\u201d and to \u201cbe confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and have the assistance of counsel for his defense.\u201d<\/p>\n

None of this protection is offered under the process of an impeachment inquiry<\/em>!\u00a0 All the Democrats have done thus far is to make never-ending allegations, based on the statements of unnamed witnesses (some of whom have hidden under the cloak of whistleblower protection), and based on \u201cevidence\u201d (conjecture and hypotheticals) that does not exist.<\/p>\n

As indicated above, an impeachment investigation<\/em> would pressure the Speaker to either, in a timely fashion, relent in her activities and stop the investigation, or to move forward with an official impeachment process.<\/em>\u00a0 So, what is this process? \u00a0It\u2019s all laid out in our Constitution:<\/p>\n

Article I, Section 2, Clause 5 states that the House of Representatives shall have the sole power of Impeachment and that the impeachment process<\/em> is carried forward only if a majority of Representatives in the House vote in favor of doing so.<\/p>\n

Article I, Section 3, Clause 6 states that impeachments shall be tried in the Senate.<\/p>\n

To summarize, the Speaker does not want this process to go forward to the Senate for myriad reasons; the three most significant reasons are:<\/p>\n