Hunter Biden is the father of an Arkansas woman’s child, paternity test confirms and the 28-year-old Lunden Alexis Roberts is demanding child support for their baby, who is now eligible for Secret Service protection because of grandpa Joe’s political status.

BREAKING: Hunter Biden Claimed He Did Not Impregnate Woman. Test Results Say That’s Not True. https://t.co/qMuR9gYLAg

— Mike Cernovich (@Cernovich) November 20, 2019

TDW:

Hunter Biden, the son of former Vice President and current Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden, had claimed earlier this year that he did not father a child with an Arkansas woman while he was living with the widow of his deceased brother. Biden even agreed to take a DNA test to prove that he was not the father.

The results from the DNA test were released on Wednesday, and they reportedly show that Biden is the father of the child.

“DNA testing has established, ‘with scientific certainty,’ that Hunter Biden is the father of an Arkansas baby, according to a motion filed Wednesday in Independence County on behalf of the child’s mother, Lunden Alexis Roberts,” The Arkansas Democrat Gazette reported. “Hunter Biden, who initially denied having sexual relations with Roberts, eventually agreed to take a DNA test, according to documents filed by Roberts’ attorney, Clint Lancaster.”

The Arkansas Democrat Gazette added that, according to the filing, Hunter Biden “is not expected to challenge the results of the DNA test or the testing process.” More

What is with these people and their DNA tests that they know they are going to fail, claiming the opposite? Another reminder that you can’t trust Hunter Biden to tell you the truth.

What a piece or work, thrown out of the Navy for drugs, briefly married to his deceased brother’s wife, takes a very shady Board position with a Ukrainian energy company, and now an allegation that he fathered a child out of wedlock. Can’t wait until he testifies to the Senate!

— Ready Three (@BigIronPhlyer) November 20, 2019

Getting him under oath to testify before Congress or the Senate could be dicey if you don’t know when he’s lying or telling the truth. Given past behavior, you can probably bet that he’s lying!

Motion in Hunter Biden pate… by Scott Carroll on Scribd

These faux impeachment hearings have been a major disaster for the Democrats, at least as far as the TV ratings go. Nobody is watching. Nobody cares.

As House Democrats hit their second week of fake impeachment hearings, the Democrats have not warmed America up to the fever pitch that Democrats need for impeachment.

The breathless media and the Democrats have jumped onto rooftops to scream that the fake “witnesses” the Democrats have pushed before a House committee have each left “bombshell” testimony that damns the president for quid pro quo… or bribery… or something.

These “bombshells” prove the evils of orange man, the Democrats insist.

Yet… America simply does not care. Ratings for the TV extravaganza have been horrible.

According to a report by The Hill, viewership tumbled by more than one million for last Friday’s proceedings.

“Nielsen Media Research data showed 12.7 million people tuning in to the second day of the impeachment hearings across ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox News, CNN and MSNBC,” The Hill reported.

Fox had the biggest audience (like always) with 2.8 million viewers and the others went down exponentially from there. But Friday’s ratings collapsed 35 percent over the first day on Wednesday.

The ratings are a huge disappointment for Democrats, especially compared to other recent Washington testimony events. In February, former Trump personal attorney and fixer Michael Cohen’s testimony realized 15.8 million viewers. And in July 13 million tuned in to watch the senile Robert Mueller testify about his empty Russia investigation.

Meanwhile, more than 20 million Americans tuned in to watch the confirmation hearings for Brett Kavanaugh and the lies spewed by whackjob Christine Blasey Ford.

In the universe of Washington events, this impeachment imbroglio is a huge failure for the Democrat Party.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on facebook.com/Warner.Todd.Huston.

A new report alleges that Democrat Adam Schiff’s so-called “whistleblower” coordinated his attack on President Donald Trump with Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the Democrat’s recent star witness.

On Saturday, the Washington Post reported on some of the steps a CIA analyst took to report his concerns that in a July 25 phone call, the president urged Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to start an investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden.

“The analyst had served on the National Security Council during the Trump administration and had been in the presence of the president. After returning to the CIA, his job required him to continue to participate in National Security Council meetings,” the Post reported.

The paper also noted that this faux “whistleblower” had even attended meeting in the White House in August.

The Post also reported that the “whistleblower,” Eric Ciaramella, did not tell any of his CIA colleagues of his plans to attack the president as he worked on the lan in his CIA cubicle after hours.

But before filing the complaint, this “whistleblower” spoke with a White House official who said he was concerned over Trump’s conversation with Zelensky, too. The paper wrote that the “shaken” official said the call was “frightening,” “crazy,” and “completely lacking in substance related to national security.”

The Post said that the White House official the “whistleblower” spoke to was Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman.

“The analyst does not identify the official in his July 26 memo, which was obtained by congressional investigators in the impeachment inquiry. But Vindman, in his testimony, disclosed that he had spoken to officials outside the White House within days of the Trump-Zelensky call,” the paper reported.

Some felt Vindman was problematic. For one, Timothy Morrison, a former deputy assistant to the president and the National Security Council’s former senior director for Europe and Russia, testified that he had “concerns” about Vindman’s “judgment.”

And well before the “whistleblower’s” claims, others also said that they felt that Vindman should have been fired from his role in the White House.

In the end, the Post’s report seems to show that Vindman and Ciaramella carried out a coordinated attack on President Trump that was carefully planned for months.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on facebook.com/Warner.Todd.Huston.

Tax filings show Al Sharpton was paid more than $1 million by his own charity in 2018 but he says he’s worth it because he “works six days a week.”

Al’s the million-dollar minister. He defended his hefty paycheck, claiming CEOs at other non-profit organizations make similar amounts of money.

Al Sharpton gets $1M in pay from his own charity, tax filings show https://t.co/pSH9AerIPp

— Sara A. Carter (@SaraCarterDC) November 17, 2019

Fox News:

The Harlem-based nonprofit — which Sharpton controls as president and CEO — said the extra cash was to make up for the years from 2004 to 2017 when he didn’t get his full pay.

NAN said it hired an executive compensation firm that determined the good reverend was owed $1.252 million — but he was generously willing to take $500,000 less.

Sharpton and the nonprofit’s board also agreed “he has now been fully compensated for all the years he was underpaid and received no bonus,” the NAN statement said.

The sharp-dressing, silver-tongued preacher defended the windfall before taking the stage for his weekly rally at NAN’s House of Justice in Harlem, an event where attendees throw cash in the collection bucket at the reverend’s behest.

“Fifteen years, you are talking about since 2004 when I came back after running for president,” he said. “For anybody else it would be laughable.”

He said he also deserved the 2018 raise.

“It’s a six-day-a-week job and several hours a day and when [the compensation firm] compared it to other companies, other nonprofits, that’s the salary that they would get,” he said. More

Just your typical Democrat doing what they do best. Biden, Hillary, Sharpton they are all the same. And yet they attack President Trump that works for free and gets results that are practically unheard of.

Twitter weighs in:

Why are the Dems so concerned about Trump’s taxes when Al Sharpton’s are so bad?

Because they assume that Trump doing what THEY are doing!! It’s projection & distraction. “Let’s keep all eyes on Trump so nobody will look at us!” Except…God sees & He reveals secrets. Wait 4 it!

— Lynn Metzger (@narniagirl55) November 17, 2019

While the President refuses and donates his salary. What a contrast.

— Neil Axelrod (@NeilAxelrod) November 17, 2019

He still owes at least 4 million in back taxes too!

— Jessica Parsons (@goodjerseygirl) November 17, 2019

He’s another example of elite getting away with things. Two tier Justice system.

— Rock Waters (@waters_rock) November 17, 2019

How can this be legal? Is this how so many politicians cash in??? #DrainTheSwamp

— Carol (@CarolCATX) November 17, 2019

Former Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch contradicted herself during her Friday testimony at the Democrat fake show impeachment trials and ultimately proved she had nothing pertinent to say about the charges the Democrats are throwing at President Donald Trump.

It looks like Yovanovitch lied when she said that the Obama administration never questioned the Hunter Biden and Ukrainian gas company Burisma situation but then later she said the Obama administration prepped her on that exact same issue.

This deep Democrat operative’s contradictory statements came during questioning by Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY):

Stefanik: The first time that you personally became aware of Burisma was actually when you were being prepared by the Obama State Department for your Senate confirmation hearings and this was in the form of practice questions and answers. This was your deposition. And you testified that in this particular practice Q&A with the Obama State Department, it wasn’t just generally about Burisma and corruption, it was specifically about Hunter Biden and Burisma. Is that correct?

Yovanovitch::Yes, it is.

Stefanik::And the exact quote from your testimony is, “The way the question was phrased in this model Q&A was, ‘what can you tell us about Hunter Biden being named to the board of Burisma?’” So for the millions of Americans watching, President Obama’s own State Department was so concerned about potential conflicts of interest from Hunter Biden’s role at Burisma that they raised it themselves while prepping this wonderful ambassador nominee before her confirmation and yet our Democratic colleagues and the Chairman of this committee cry foul when we dare ask that same question that the Obama State Department was so concerned about.

This seems like it could be a contradiction from what she said earlier:

Amb. Yovanovitch admits Obama admin State Department prepped her on Hunter Biden & Burisma during confirmationpic.twitter.com/FLLCIrjvsM

— Tommy Pigott (@TCPigott) November 15, 2019

That is not what she said earlier…

“And although I have met former Vice President Biden several times over the course of our many years in government service, neither he nor the previous administration ever raised the issue of either Burisma or Hunter Biden with me,” she said.

What Amb Yovanovitch said earlier:

“although I have met former Vice President Biden several times over the course of our many years in government service, neither he nor the previous administration ever raised the issue of either Burisma or Hunter Biden with me” pic.twitter.com/AWhrogxFpN

— Tommy Pigott (@TCPigott) November 15, 2019

Later, Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-TX) later raised this question:

Ratcliffe: I’d like to ask you about your earlier testimony about your Senate confirmation and congresswoman Stefanik had asked you how the Obama-Biden State Department had prepared you to answer questions about Burisma and Hunter Biden specifically. You recall that?

Yovanovitch: Yes.

Ratcliffe:And she mentioned that you had been asked or been prepared for a question about Hunter Biden’s role on the board of Burisma but I don’t think that you gave us the answer or answers that the Obama-Biden State Department prepared you to give in response to that question. Do you remember what those answers were?

Yovanovitch:Yeah it was something along the lines of, “I would refer you to the vice president’s office on that.”

Ratcliffe:So did they in the course of that brief you about the amount of money that Hunter Biden was being paid by Burisma?

Yovanovitch: No, this wasn’t part of a briefing. I mean I had sort of big old books with questions that might come up.

Ratcliffe:In preparation for your confirmation and they thought that Hunter Biden’s role at Burisma might be significant enough that it would come up during your confirmation, is that correct?

Yovanovitch: Apparently so, I mean there were hundreds of questions.

Ratcliffe:Well, hundreds of questions, but were there hundreds of companies? how many companies other than Burisma did the Obama-Biden State Department prepare you to give answers for and if so, if there were others. which ones?

Yovanovitch:I just don’t recall.

Ratcliffe:You don’t recall that there were any other companies, is that correct?

Yovanovitch: I’m quite sure there probably were some companies, but I mean, you know, this is a while ago and I don’t recall.

Ratcliffe:But you specifically recall Burisma?

Yovanovitch:Yes.

Ratcliffe:All right, out of thousands of companies in the Ukraine the only one that you recall the Obama-Biden State Department preparing you to answer questions about was the one where the vice president’s son was on the board, is that fair?

Yovanovitch: Yes.

Amb. Yovanovitch says Burisma was the only company she specifically remembers being prepped on pic.twitter.com/XnRjmcM3xZ

— Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) November 15, 2019

Rep. Stefanik did a great job on Friday:

The facts are clear, confirmed by our witness, Ambassador Yovanovitch: defensive lethal aid was provided to Ukraine not by the Obama Administration, but by the Trump Administration. pic.twitter.com/QBOSFg1pMV

— Elise Stefanik (@EliseStefanik) November 15, 2019

Rep. Chris Stewart also revealed how meaningless Yavanocitch’s “testimony” was:

In 30 seconds, @RepChrisStewart got the answers that House Democrats have spent 7 hours trying to avoid.

7 hours that Congress could’ve spent working for you—on drug price legislation, USMCA, immigration reform, or infrastructure—instead of for their own political careers. https://t.co/dRhvjp7NWq pic.twitter.com/PkuyG8m4H0

— The White House (@WhiteHouse) November 15, 2019

The facts show that Yovanovitch had absolutely no testimony that related to President Trump’s Ukraine call and it appears that her initial intention was to cover for the Bidens. Until the Republican Reps uncovered her lies.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on facebook.com/Warner.Todd.Huston.

A new poll finds that black and Hispanic voters feel that the media is not doing its job and reporting on the impeachment of Donald Trump, but is, instead, trying to help Democrats achieve the ouster of the president.

According to a national survey by Rasmussen Reports, 53 percent of all voters said that the media is trying to help the Democrats destroy Trump.

That means most Americans think the media is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Democrat Party and has failed to do its job of reporting the news.

This is terrible news for the left-wing, biased, mainstream media.

“When they write or talk about the impeachment effort, are most reporters trying to help impeach President Trump or block his impeachment? Or are most reporters simply interested in reporting the news in an unbiased manner?” Rasmussen wrote.

The answers the polling firm got were telling:

• 53 percent said the media is trying to “Help impeach President Trump.”
• Only 32 percent said they report “news in an unbiased an unbiased manner”
• And a tiny 8 percent said the media is trying to “block his impeachment.”

Drilling down to the demos, though, shows that minorities are sour on the media’s efforts in this impeachment farce.

While 51 percent of whites said that the media is out to get Trump, an even greater 53 percent of blacks said that the media is biased against Trump, while 60 percent of other minorities think the media is failing to do its job as reporters.

“Voters are mad at Trump and his political opponents, but they’re angriest at the media these days,” Rasmussen noted.

“Distrust of political news reporting remains at a record high, with just over half of voters now convinced that most in the media are out to get Trump. By contrast, 48% thought most reporters were trying to help Obama pass his agenda.”

The survey of 1,000 likely voters has a margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on facebook.com/Warner.Todd.Huston.

As Democrats continue their fantasy impeachment show trials, they continue to ignore the fact that several Ukrainian officials have said they felt no pressure from Trump and never understood there were any quids pro quo in effect over President Trump’s interactions with them.

The latest Ukrainian official who said there was no quid pro quo is Ukrainian foreign minister Vadym Prystaiko.

On Thursday, Prystaiko said that U.S. Ambassador to the E.U. Gordon Sondland had “never” linked U.S. aid to Ukrainian investigations of the Biden and Burisma.

Prystaiko said that there had been no link in discussions at the time with Sondland, as Reuters reported:

Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Vadym Prystaiko said on Thursday that U.S. ambassador Gordon Sondland did not explicitly link military aid to Kiev with opening an investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Interfax Ukraine reported.

…

“Ambassador Sondland did not tell us, and certainly did not tell me, about a connection between the assistance and the investigations. You should ask him,” Prystaiko said about Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union.

…

“I have never seen a direct relationship between investigations and security assistance,” Prystaiko was quoted as saying by Interfax. “Yes, the investigations were mentioned, you know, in the conversation of the presidents. But there was no clear connection between these events.”

Prystaiko is not the first Ukrainian official to say there was no quid pro quo.

Back in October, UkrainianPresident Volodymyr Zelensky said he felt no pressure at all from Trump on the Biden matter. According to CNBC, Zelensky said he saw no evidence that Trump was trying to blackmail him, he felt no pressure, and there was no quid pro quo.

And yet, the Democrats have completely ignored this testimony from Ukrainian officials in favor of believing the third and fourth-hand exclamations of Democrat operatives who worked at the White House, and the Department of State, not to mention Obama’s corrupt CIA.

Meanwhile, Ukrainian officials have also revealed that millions of dollars were funneled to Hunter Biden and John Kerry’s family by Burisma.

We also know that once all these millions were paid to Biden’s kid and Kerry’s kid, Burisma mysteriously found itself easily gaining the ear of Obama’s State Department for favorable treatment.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on facebook.com/Warner.Todd.Huston.