If the State Dept., Yovanovitch and Ukraine were all concerned about Hunter Biden at Burisma, then why aren’t Trump and Zelensky allowed to be concerned, too?
http://dailytorch.com/2019/11/if-the-state-dept-yovanovitch-and-ukraine-were-all-concerned-about-hunter-biden-at-burisma-then-why-arent-trump-and-zelensky-allowed-to-be-concerned-too/

Even former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch was concerned about Hunter Biden’s appointment to Burisma Holdings’ board of directors in 2014, and the potential for a conflict of interest with having the son of the Vice President serving in a company under active investigation by Ukrainian prosecutors for corruption. So, everyone agreed Burisma had a corruption problem and that the Bidens created conflicts of interest: the State Department, Yovanovitch, Ukrainian prosecutors, the current Ukrainian President Zelensky and yes, President Trump. But if everyone was concerned about Hunter Biden at Burisma, then why aren’t Trump and Zelensky allowed to be concerned, too?

Trade in goods deficit with China down 12.8 percent first nine months of 2019, or $38.5 billion as trade talks continue:
http://dailytorch.com/2019/11/trade-in-goods-deficit-with-china-down-12-8-percent-first-nine-months-of-2019-or-38-5-billion-as-trade-talks-continue/

The U.S. trade in goods deficit with China is down 12.8 percent in the first nine months of 2019, or $38.5 billion, compared to 2018, according to the latest data from the U.S. Census Bureau. The numbers came with the 10 percent tariffs President Donald Trump levied on $200 billion of goods and 25 percent on $50 billion until May, when Trump raised the tariff to 25 percent for all $250 billion. Then, in July he added another 10 percent tariff on the remaining $300 billion of goods, bringing it to a total of almost $550 billion of goods being taxed. Overall imports from China for the year are already down $53 billion this year. At the current pace, exports to the U.S. could drop by $72.5 billion, or 13.4 percent this year. That amounts to a 0.5 percent of China’s $13.6 trillion Gross Domestic Product. The longer Beijing waits to make a deal, the more the tariffs go up. What do you think?

Democrats’ star witness Ambassador George Kent admits Ukraine, Burisma are corrupt and needed to be investigated:
http://dailytorch.com/2019/11/democrats-star-witness-ambassador-george-kent-admits-ukraine-burisma-are-corrupt-and-needed-to-be-investigated/

One of Democrats’ star witnesses, Deputy Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs George Kent, admitted in testimony on Nov. 13 that the Ukrainian natural gas firm, Burisma Holdings the company is corrupt, the head of the company awarded gas exploration leases to himself when he was in government, is assumed to have bribed prosecutors and that he favored that Ukraine investigate to “find who … the corrupt prosecutor was.” But to hear Democrats tell it, Burisma was as clean as the driven snow. The reason to investigate was not because of corruption, but because Trump wanted to “get” Biden. That any investigation of the company was therefore baseless. That’s the only way their claim of abuse of power works. Under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution, President Trump “shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed…” Remarkably, Democrats want Trump removed from office for doing precisely that. And that the rule of law should not apply to the Bidens, because that would interfere in the elections. “No one is above the law,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) ironically shouts as justification. Does it sound stupid when Democrats say it?

Necessary Noise: How Donald Trump Inflames the Culture War and Why This Is Good News for America
https://www.amazon.com/Necessary-Noise-Inflames-Culture-America/dp/1546076581/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=

Why does President Donald Trump connect so well with the American people?

Did Yovanovitch lie about contacting committee staff about the so-called whistleblower complaint and a ‘do-not-prosecute’ list in Ukraine?
http://dailytorch.com/2019/11/did-yovanovitch-lie-about-contacting-committee-staff-about-the-so-called-whistleblower-complaint-and-a-do-not-prosecute-list-in-ukraine/

Former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch was in touch with the House Foreign Affairs Committee two days after the anonymous CIA so-called whistleblower made his complaint against President Donald Trump, and she admits she objected to what she called “politically-motivated” prosecutions in Ukraine. But is that the whole truth?

The President has authority to withhold appropriated funds under law, including military assistance to Ukraine while considering a deferral or rescission:
http://dailytorch.com/2019/11/the-president-has-authority-to-withhold-appropriated-funds-under-law-including-military-assistance-to-ukraine-while-considering-a-deferral-or-rescission/

Congressional Democrats appear ready to vote to impeach and remove President Trump for even considering requesting a rescission of military funding to Ukraine, which he’s allowed to do under the Impoundment Control Act. Now, that might be cause to perhaps to ham out a legal dispute in U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia over the limits of fiscal apportionment and rescission law. That’s not a high crime, misdemeanor, treason or bribery, it’s a dispute between the branches over what the letter of the law means. In the end, however, no rescissions were even sought, and certainly none carrying through the end of the fiscal year, and all the monies were ultimately spent, rendering the question moot. This is what Democrats want to overturn the 2016 election over? C’mon.

Local cities rejecting HUD funds over zoning concerns and then accepting them after Congress banned federal interference proves Article I defund works:
http://dailytorch.com/2019/11/local-cities-rejecting-hud-funds-over-zoning-concerns-and-then-accepting-them-after-congress-banned-federal-interference-proves-article-i-defund-works/

In 2016, Hampden Township, Pa. opted out of receiving part of the $1.4 million of community development block grants from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) had allocated to Cumberland County. The issue? The 2015 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing regulation put in place by the Obama administration that allows HUD to condition $3 billion of those grants on making changes to local zoning ordinances to comply federal income and race guidelines. More than 1,200 cities and counties nationwide receive those grants. But, because of a change to federal law by Congress to prohibit the use of funds to rezone local cities and counties under the regulation, allowing cities and counties can decide for themselves how to use the funds, , Hampden Township has reversed course. But will the federal government stay out of the way?

Impeachment flops as Ambassador Sondland says he ‘presumed’ Ukrainian military assistance was ‘likely’ being conditioned, but nobody told him it was:
http://dailytorch.com/2019/11/impeachment-flops-as-ambassador-sondland-says-he-presumed-ukrainian-military-assistance-was-being-conditioned-but-nobody-told-him-it-was/

U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland issued a new statement on Nov. 4 to the House Intelligence Committee that he “presumed” military assistance to Ukraine was “likely” being conditioned by the administration when he spoke to a Ukrainian presidential aide on Sept. 1, but that he “did not know… when, why, or by whom the aid was suspended…” On Aug. 28, Politico broke the story that the U.S. had decided to pause U.S. military assistance to Ukraine, days before a planned meeting between Vice President Mike Pence and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in Warsaw, which is how Ukrainian officials had learned about it. Then the meeting in Warsaw happened, and the issuewas raised there by both Zelensky and afterward by his aide, Andriy Yermak. But if Sondland was “presuming” the aid was being leveraged, and told Ukrainian presidential aide Yermak that the military assistance would “likely” not resume until the statement had been issued, then he was guessing. Meaning, there was no quid pro quo. What do you think?

Ukraine was concerned about violations of U.S. law, not Ukrainian law, so there was no investigation by Ukraine to be requested by President Trump:
http://dailytorch.com/2019/11/ukraine-was-concerned-about-violations-of-u-s-law-not-ukrainian-law-so-there-was-no-investigation-by-ukraine-to-be-requested-by-president-trump/

Former Ukrainian Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko in a Sept. 29 BBC interview confirmed concerns about Burisma and former Vice President Joe Biden were that they possibly violated U.S. laws, not Ukrainian laws, saying he told that to Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani: “I told him the same I told you — it is not my jurisdiction… It is likely to be the jurisdiction of the U.S. If you will send me a request, yes, I will give you all official information, but it is not Ukrainian jurisdiction — that was my answer.” So, if there were no violations of Ukrainian law, what investigation could President Donald Trump have pressured Ukraine to pursue?

Can federalism survive? It’s up to Congress.
http://dailytorch.com/2019/10/can-federalism-survive-its-up-to-congress/

Under the original Constitution, and even with its subsequent amendments, power was supposed to be distributed between the federal and state and local governments, with the idea that the national government would have the fewest powers to affect local administration except in certain areas. And so, the federal government was tasked with regulating interstate and foreign commerce, creating uniform immigration laws, building roads, bridges and the like, post offices, intellectual property laws, establishing courts, ensuring the national defense and so forth. Those are all Article 1, Section 8 powers under the Constitution. Those powers not articulated were granted to the states under the 10th Amendment. But one big advantage the federal government and Congress have is the power to spend and borrow money on the credit of the United States and to print money. States cannot do that, and so with the limitless power of the purse, the federal government has been able to progressively expand control over state and local governments by attaching terms and conditions to federal funding. But just because the federal government can do something under the Constitution, does not mean it ought to. Instead, it could pass laws denying funds limiting federal intrusions into local matters. An obvious example is Congress defunding implementation of the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing regulation that sought to condition community development block grants on making changes to local zoning along income and racial guidelines. Other times, Congress may wish to compel state and local cooperation, for example, in the implementation of federal immigration laws. Where do you draw the line?