Advertisements
Open post

William Barr Gives a Grand Speech – Now, About that Investigation…

Today’s Campaign Update, Part II
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

Attorney General William Barr delivered a hard-hitting speech at the Federalist Society’s National Lawyers Convention on Friday evening. – In the speech, the AG presented a vigorous defense of President Trump and his administration, and a pointed take-down of the Democrat-funded “resistance” and its repugnant, ongoing efforts to destroy the country from within.

It’s more than an hour long, but well worth your time to watch. Below is a video of the speech, followed by key outtakes from the transcript:

Outtakes (full transcript can be read here):

Unfortunately, over the past several decades, we have seen steady encroachment on Presidential authority by the other branches of government.  This process I think has substantially weakened the functioning of the Executive Branch, to the detriment of the Nation.  This evening, I would like to expand a bit on these themes.

One of the more amusing aspects of modern progressive polemic is their breathless attacks on the “unitary executive theory.”  They portray this as some new-fangled “theory” to justify Executive power of sweeping scope. In reality, the idea of the unitary executive does not go so much to the breadth of Presidential power.  Rather, the idea is that, whatever the Executive powers may be, they must be exercised under the President’s supervision.  This is not “new,” and it is not a “theory.”  It is a description of what the Framers unquestionably did in Article II of the Constitution.

So let me turn now to how the Executive is presently faring in these interbranch battles. I am concerned that the deck has become stacked against the Executive.  Since the mid-60s, there has been a steady grinding down of the Executive branch’s authority, that accelerated after Watergate.  More and more, the President’s ability to act in areas in which he has discretion has become smothered by the encroachments of the other branches.

Immediately after President Trump won election, opponents inaugurated what they called “The Resistance,” and they rallied around an explicit strategy of using every tool and maneuver available to sabotage the functioning of his Administration.  Now, “resistance” is the language used to describe insurgency against rule imposed by an occupying military power.  It obviously connotes that the government is not legitimate.  This is a very dangerous – indeed incendiary – notion to import into the politics of a democratic republic.  What it means is that, instead of viewing themselves as the “loyal opposition,” as opposing parties have done in the past, they essentially see themselves as engaged in a war to cripple, by any means necessary, a duly elected government.  

Congress has in recent years also largely abdicated its core function of legislating on the most pressing issues facing the national government.  They either decline to legislate on major questions or, if they do, punt the most difficult and critical issues by making broad delegations to a modern administrative state that they increasingly seek to insulate from Presidential control.

Of course, Congress’s effective withdrawal from the business of legislating leaves it with a lot of time for other pursuits.  And the pursuit of choice, particularly for the opposition party, has been to drown the Executive Branch with “oversight” demands for testimony and documents.  I do not deny that Congress has some implied authority to conduct oversight as an incident to its Legislative Power.  But the sheer volume of what we see today – the pursuit of scores of parallel “investigations” through an avalanche of subpoenas – is plainly designed to incapacitate the Executive Branch, and indeed is touted as such.

In recent years, we have seen substantial encroachment by Congress in the area of executive privilege.  The Executive Branch and the Supreme Court have long recognized that the need for confidentiality in Executive Branch decision-making necessarily means that some communications must remain off limits to Congress and the public.   There was a time when Congress respected this important principle as well.  But today, Congress is increasingly quick to dismiss good-faith attempts to protect Executive Branch equities, labeling such efforts “obstruction of Congress” and holding Cabinet Secretaries in contempt.

In recent years, we have seen substantial encroachment by Congress in the area of executive privilege.  The Executive Branch and the Supreme Court have long recognized that the need for confidentiality in Executive Branch decision-making necessarily means that some communications must remain off limits to Congress and the public.   There was a time when Congress respected this important principle as well.  But today, Congress is increasingly quick to dismiss good-faith attempts to protect Executive Branch equities, labeling such efforts “obstruction of Congress” and holding Cabinet Secretaries in contempt.

One of the ironies of today is that those who oppose this President constantly accuse this Administration of “shredding” constitutional norms and waging a war on the rule of law.  When I ask my friends on the other side, what exactly are you referring to?  I get vacuous stares, followed by sputtering about the Travel Ban or some such thing.  While the President has certainly thrown out the traditional Beltway playbook, he was upfront about that beforehand, and the people voted for him.  What I am talking about today are fundamental constitutional precepts.  The fact is that this Administration’s policy initiatives and proposed rules, including the Travel Ban, have transgressed neither constitutional, nor traditional, norms, and have been amply supported by the law and patiently litigated through the Court system to vindication.

Indeed, measures undertaken by this Administration seem a bit tame when compared to some of the unprecedented steps taken by the Obama Administration’s aggressive exercises of Executive power – such as, under its DACA program, refusing to enforce broad swathes of immigration law.

Conservatives, on the other hand, do not seek an earthly paradise.  We are interested in preserving over the long run the proper balance of freedom and order necessary for healthy development of natural civil society and individual human flourishing.  This means that we naturally test the propriety and wisdom of action under a “rule of law” standard.  The essence of this standard is to ask what the overall impact on society over the long run if the action we are taking, or principle we are applying, in a given circumstance was universalized – that is, would it be good for society over the long haul if this was done in all like circumstances?

For these reasons, conservatives tend to have more scruple over their political tactics and rarely feel that the ends justify the means.  And this is as it should be, but there is no getting around the fact that this puts conservatives at a disadvantage when facing progressive holy far, especially when doing so under the weight of a hyper-partisan media.

In essence, the Court has taken the rules that govern our domestic criminal justice process and carried them over and superimposed them on the Nation’s activities when it is engaged in armed conflict with foreign enemies.  This rides roughshod over a fundamental distinction that is integral to the Constitution and integral to the role played by the President in our system.

This is a very dangerous and indeed incendiary notion to import into the politics of a Democratic republic. The fact is, that, yes, while the president has certainly thrown out the traditional beltway playbook and punctilio, he was upfront about what he was going to do and the people decided that he was going to serve as president.

[End of Outtakes]

There is much, much more, but these outtakes highlight the essence of the speech, which is powerful, incredibly well-thought and well-drafted, and shows without doubt that Barr has a clear-eyed understanding of the war the disloyal, seditious left is waging on the foundations of the American Republic.

But at the end of the day, this is just a speech and these words, while great, are just words. They only will ultimately have real meaning if they are intended to serve as the prelude for the long-delayed Horowitz Report to be finally issued and for the investigation of U.S. Attorney John Durham to start bearing fruit in terms of public perp walks, indictments and most importantly of all, convictions involving the high Obama officials who created and led this ongoing coup d’etat.

How about it, Mr. Barr?

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Advertisements
Open post

Marie Yovanovitch Just Wants to Live in a Hallmark Movie – Is That too Much to Ask?

Today’s Campaign Update
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

Tired of all this #WINNING yet? Not even close. – Every stock market index set a new record-high close on Friday, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average closing above 28,000 for the first time, a level that no Democrat on the face of the earth could have imagined just three short years ago. Media outlets like CNBC of course attributed the weeks astonishing gains to good news on the trade front, which is partially valid.

But let’s not kid ourselves here: Traders keep up with politics very closely, and they were also reacting to the confirmation that, in their ongoing three-ring fake impeachment circus, Bug-eyes Schiff and San Fran Nan are holding a big bag filled with nothing. Or maybe San Francisco sidewalk poop. Either way, this game – and sadly, this very serious abuse of our system is just a game to the Democrats – is not going well for the bad guys.

It isn’t going well even though they got some unanticipated help from President Donald Trump himself on Friday morning, when he stupidly intervened in the pointless, overwrought testimony by ex-Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch with this:

Dear Mr. President: We love you, but man, your role model Sun Tzu would have definitely advised against that particular move. That’s not 4-D chess, that’s a Jason Garrett 4th-down call with the game on the line. When your opponent is in the process of destroying itself, just get out of the way.

It wasn’t so much the content of the tweet, but the timing. Sure, Yovanovitch was coming across as a sympathetic witness, but mainly to those who wanted to be sympathetic to her in the first place. Plus, she was at that moment in time being questioned by Bug-eyes, the most notorious pathological liar and least sympathetic figure in the entire U.S. congress. Why interfere with that?

Schiff’s eyes damn near popped right out of his pasty face as he read the tweet to the national TV audience, knowing that the President had just handed him and his corrupt media toadies what will become the narrative for this entire weekend.

Other than that single moment, Yovanovitch’s entire day boiled down to essentially this:

Yovanovitch:

“I was told…”

“I heard that…”

“It was my understanding…”

“I felt…”

“I was concerned…”

Question from Democrat lawyer and Schiff and every other Democrat on the Commitee:

“How did that make you feel?”

Yovanovitch:

“I don’t know…”

“It made me feel terrible…”

“I felt intimidated…”

“Why did they say mean things about me…”

“I’m brave, just like the diplomats at Benghazi (seriously, she compared herself to those who came back in body bags thanks to Hillary Clinton’s and Barack Obama’s mendacity)…”

Question from Democrat lawyer and Schiff and every other Democrat on the Commitee:

“How did that make you feel?”

The entire day boiled down to how Ms. Yovanovitch feels. She was there for no reason other than a pathetic attempt to garner sympathy from the public.

Illinois Congressman Mike Quigley, the simpleton who told us on Wednesday that hearsay evidence is all like, superior to first-hand evidence and stuff, or something, actually boiled Yovanovitch’s day right down to its very essence in his questioning, which amounted to:

– It’s a Hallmark movie (yes, he actually said this, too)
– The ambassador’s feelings have been hurt
– It was not her preference to be fired.

Oh. Okay. Cue the bad Christmas music, someone.

Image may contain: 2 people, people standing and text

The day will do no lasting damage to President Trump, even with Bret Baier and Chris Wallace urging the Democrats to somehow turn the tweet into an article of impeachment claiming “witness tampering” (yes, they both actually said that, too). But the tweet did throw the committee Republicans off their game. It was a needless interruption into a day that was destined to go just like Wednesday had gone, with a witness who came off as “sympathetic” to corrupt media hacks and other DC swamp skunks, but who would do nothing to move American public opinion, which, again, IS WHAT THIS IS ALL ABOUT.

No summation of the day’s events would be complete without including a couple of clips from Republican Cong. Elise Stefanik, who is quickly turning into a major force with her questioning in this process.

First, Stefanik gets Yovanovitch to admit that she was prepped by the Obama Administration to answer questions about Joe and Hunter Biden’s influence racket related to corrupt Ukrainian gas company Burisma:

Second, watch as Sefanik almost literally undresses Bug-eyes before the nation’s eyes. It is a true tour de force for the ages:

Beautiful.

One last word here: The Republicans have got to replace their staff lawyer, Steve Castor, with someone who knows what he or she is doing. I’m sure Castor is a fine committee counsel, but he is just god-awful on television. This guy has more rabbit holes to run down than Bugs Bunny, and he is clearly not at all comfortable in this role. The Democrats had the foresight to hire contract counsel, Lawfare attorney Daniel Goldman, just for this impeachment process. Goldman hasn’t been great, but he has been more effective than Castor.

Devin Nunes has this entire weekend to go find an attorney who actually knows how to question a witness in a live hearing. There are about 10,000 of them practicing in Washington, DC. I’d bet dozens of them have been knocking down his door the past few days. Hire one of them, Mr. Chairman.

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

New Democrat Polling Gives us a New Impeachment Narrative

Today’s Campaign Update, Part II
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

Now  the Democrats’ handy poll-tested and focus-grouped word is “bribery.” – “Quid pro quo” never did work: It was too clumsy and all in Latin and stuff. And nobody was buying “obstruction of congress,” which is not even a real thing. So, San Fran Nan and Bug-eyes Schiff got their pollsters out on the job making calls and convened some focus groups to find them a handy new word to describe exactly what it is they’re accusing the President of the United States of doing.

This is how the Democrats really do this stuff, folks. No kidding. Everything they do, every word San Fran Nan utters in public, is based on data from polls and focus groups. They literally never do anything real anymore – haven’t for about 27 years now, in fact, since the Clintons rose to power.

The problem for them, though, is that polling and focus-grouping is a fool’s game, the most completely inexact science this side of global warming. You would think they might have learned that lesson back in 2016, when they had to eat the cost of all those pre-planned Hillary Clinton victory parties that all the polls and focus groups told them to go ahead and pay for.

But here they are, still buying in to their failed process, even after the implosion of “Russia collusion” and “obstruction of justice” and the Stormy Daniels payoff and all the myriad smears of Brett Kavanaugh and every other poll-and-focus-group-tested tactic they’ve deployed over the past four years.

Armed with her latest poll and focus group data, San Fran Nan put on her red dress and held another stammering, doddering presser at the capital last night, during which she revealed her fancy new word:
“Bribery.”

Here’s a clip:

Yes, friends, now we are supposed to believe that Donald Trump, on that July 25 call – the transcript of which we have all had the ability to actually read for ourselves for the last 6 weeks – actually “bribed” Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky. Never mind that that literally is nowhere to be found or even remotely implied in the transcript of that call – San Fran Nan and her little pathologically-lying toady Adam Schiff say it’s bribery, so hey, it’s bribery. Plus, they have a parade of non-witnesses who are, like Bill Taylor and dapper dandy George Kent, going to testify about their third-and-fourth-hand hearsay gossip to back up the Democrats’ latest big, meaningless word.

You want to know who really did commit real, actual, by-the-book bribery of Ukrainian officials? Joe Biden. You don’t have to believe me, you can watch him brag about outright, unabashed bribery with $1 billion of American taxpayer money right here:

That’s real, true, unabashed bribery, committed by a sitting Vice President in order to protect his ne’er-do-well son, Hunter, who was getting massive payoffs by an utterly corrupt Ukrainian natural gas company called Burisma.

This, of course, is the Democrats’ favorite Saul Alinsky tactic of “projection” – accusing your enemies of doing all the bad things you in fact have done. It’s despicable, it’s demented, it’s disgusting. But hey, these are Democrats we’re talking about here. Did you really expect anything else?

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Michael Horowitz – America’s Joke-Telling DMV Sloth

Today’s Campaign Update
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

Tired of all this #WINNING yet? Nope, not a chance. – The S&P 500 set another record close on Thursday, with the Dow Jones Industrials and NASDAQ coming withing a few points of record finishing levels of their own. The Democrat tears are threatening to cause the sea levels to rise at this point.

You seriously could never make this stuff up. – The Washington Post, in its role as mouthpiece for the Deep State, published and then amended a piece Thursday evening that initially contained encouraging news about the potential release of the long-delayed report from plodding, obfuscating, delaying DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz on all the rampant abuse of the FISA system that was engaged in by the Coup Cabal. Attorney General William Barr had told reporters Wednesday evening that he believed the release of the Horowitz Report was, in his words, “imminent,” and the initial version of the Post’s report appeared to back that up.

According to the Deep State toadies at the Post, members of the Cabal are now complaining to their favorite fake news outlet that mean ol’ Horowitz isn’t letting their lawyers drag this thing out even further by delaying offering “comments” on the parts of the report that deal with their clients.

Here’s the key passage:

The Justice Department Inspector General’s office has told witnesses who are set to review draft sections of its long-awaited report on the FBI investigation of President Trump’s 2016 campaign that they will not be allowed to submit written feedback — one in a series of unusual restrictions that some fear could make the final document less accurate, people familiar with the matter said.

As is the case in most inspector general probes, witnesses are being invited to review draft sections of the report and offer comments and corrections, the people said. But — unlike most cases — they are being told those comments must be conveyed only verbally, the people said.

Oh, but it got even better:

Even though Attorney General William P. Barr and other officials have been working in recent weeks to determine what should be redacted from the report as classified or private information, people familiar with the process said that the entire draft document is marked “Top Secret,” so anyone who discusses its contents outside a secure government room could be committing a crime.

And…

Witnesses, they said, are being asked to review their sections in a secure area, after signing nondisclosure agreements, according to people familiar with the matter.

The witnesses have also been told they will not be allowed to remove any notes they make about the document, the people said.

Real Americans who really care about America were very pleased with this development, which appeared to be a good-faith effort by Horowitz and others who control this absurd process to speed it all up and deny the lawyers for all these bad actors multiple more opportunities to gum up the works. Finally, at long last, they thought, we will at least be able to firmly judge whether Horowitz himself is a good-faith actor or just another of the teeming masses of DC Swamp skunks infesting the DOJ. At least we’d finally have that.

But no, not really. Like Lucy pulling the ball away from Charlie Brown at the last second, the Post toadies came in a few hours after the piece was initially published and revised it with the news that a spokesperson for DOJ had just basically said “Just kidding. We take it all back.”

Here’s the revision:

But late Thursday night, Stephanie Logan, a spokeswoman, said the office would clarify to witnesses that they could submit written feedback “consistent with rules to protect classified information.”

“As part of our factual accuracy review, and consistent with our usual practice, we are providing witnesses with the opportunity to review portions of the report that relate to them,” Logan said. “Also consistent with our practice, we undertake every effort to ensure witnesses can provide their comments and we are clarifying to witnesses that they will be able to provide written comments, consistent with rules to protect classified information.”

Image result for lucy pulling the football

So, same old scam, different week. No one knows when the report will be coming out, or even how Attorney General Barr defines the word “imminent.” In the world of the plodding, obfuscating, interminably delaying Michael Horowitz, “imminent” could mean later this month, sometime before Christmas, along about Easter or, sadly, safely after the November 2020 elections have come and gone.

Horowitz is the living incarnation of the joke-telling sloth in the movie “Zootipia.”

You could never make this stuff up in a million years.

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

GOP House Intel Members Executed a Plan for a Change

Today’s Campaign Update
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

Tired of all this #WINNING yet? Yeah, neither am I. – Ho-hum. You know what’s coming, don’t you? That’s right: The Dow Jones Industrial average and the S&P 500 closed yet again at all-time record highs on Wednesday. Morning trading was way up as investors began to realize the clownish House Democrats were going down in flames one more time in their latest attempt to frame President Donald Trump, but then pulled back somewhat in the afternoon when news came that US and Chinese representatives had hit a snag in their trade negotiations.

Speaking of the Schiff/Pelosi/Media impeachment circus, we summarized the day’s glorious action with a late afternoon post yesterday, but it’s important to note why the Republican committee members were so successful and effective in that hearing. That’s important to understand, because it has been a rare outcome in the past for Republicans, and it shows some very promising developments are taking place within the House GOP caucus.

Let’s go these reasons:

Strategic thinking – In a somewhat stunning development, the Republican members of the committee came into the hearing with an actual strategy. This is something the Democrats have always done, at least going as far back as the Nixon impeachment. But the Republicans have, in all but a tiny few instances, always avoided strategic planning like it was a communicable disease.

I’ve actually testified in a couple of congressional hearings myself, staffed executives who were testifying in several others, and sat through dozens more over the years, and it has always been striking to me to witness the difference in coordination between the Democrats and the Republicans. The Democrats invariably come into every hearing with a clear goal in mind for outcome, assignments on who covers which specific topics during their 5 minutes of questioning, and excellent message discipline. Republicans typically seem to show up with no goal in mind, no discernible assignments and the message discipline of a bunch of alley cats.

I don’t know if credit is due to House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, Ranking Member Devin Nunes or Ohio Congressman Jim Jordan – who was transferred to House Intel just for this hearing process – but whoever it was that led this effort to do some strategic planning, kudos to you.

They had a goal in mind – And that goal was to decimate the witnesses before them. Not to play nice with them, not to waste precious time slathering praise on these two guys for their service to the country – or in George Kent’s case, his father’s and grandfather’s service – not to just question what they had to say in some half-assed manner, which has always been their norm in these settings, but to destroy their stories and reveal them for what they are: A pair of disloyal deep state hacks.

This goal became evident right from the start, when Devin Nunes basically insulted them as a couple of operatives who managed to pass muster in Schiff’s capital basement interrogation process so well that they became his star witnesses. Every Republican who asked questions was tough, pointed and precise, taking care not to needlessly insult them and set off the snowflake battalion among the perpetual outrage mob on Twitter, but to destroy the narrative they were pushing point by point.

That was the goal, and by the end of the day, the objective had been met.

They had clear assignments – Rep. Nunes was the stage-setter. His opening statement, when the live TV audience was at its maximum, was a scorched-earth devastation of the pathological Schiff personally and of the Democrats’ four-year effort to frame the President. You could tell how effective it really was by observing how the Democrat toadies in the media reacted to it: The shrillness of their response to anything Nunes does always has a directly inverse relationship to his level of effectiveness.

Jim Jordan had the assignment of ripping Bill Taylor’s credibility to tiny shreds, point by point.  This was no easy assignment, because Taylor – unlike Kent, who relied on co-opting the military service record of his ancestors to lend himself credibility – really did serve his country with valor during the Vietnam war before becoming a career bureaucrat. So, Jordan had to rip Taylor’s confusing and byzantine narrative to shreds, reducing him to a mumbling heap, and do it all with a smile on his face. He did all that and more, with Taylor even chuckling along with him at several points.

Everyone else who asked questions, from John Ratcliffe to Chris Stewart to Elise Stefanik to Michael Turner, addressed clearly-defined subject matter and were very effective. As is the case in any team effort, their level of effectiveness was no doubt enhanced by having a clear plan and strategic approach.

They had message discipline – The Republicans came into this hearing with several key messages they wanted to hammer over and over and over again in order to beat them into the collective mind of the viewing public. Among those key messages were:

– This whole process is a sham led by perhaps the single most dishonest member of congress;

– There was no quid pro quo;

– Where’s the whistleblower, and why won’t Adam Schiff be honest about his contact with him?;

– The elected President, not unelected bureaucrats like you guys, gets to determine U.S. foreign policy;

– Neither of these witnesses has any first-hand knowledge about anything relevant;

– The real bad actors relevant to Ukraine are Joe and Hunter Biden.

These messages were pounded home repeatedly, with GOP questioning leaving the two witnesses completely stumped and wordless time after time. In the end, it was Chris Stewart who got to deliver the right uppercut that devastated the Bidens:

Of course the answer is no, which is why neither of these very DC Swampy creatures could muster a response.

The Bottom Line – Unless Schiff and San Fran Nan have some witness waiting in the wings who is going to make some stunning new accusation backed-up by real, first-hand knowledge and corroborated by others, they would be far better off disbanding this budding fiasco today rather than extending the pain for another two full weeks or more.

After yesterday, they have a clear rationale for doing so, and for pinning it on the President. They could gather all their corrupt press toadies together for a live conference, and tell them that the testimony of these two third-hand gossips and nasty questioning by the GOP members of them shows that it would unproductive to continue this process. They wouldn’t want their other third-hand witnesses to be “bullied,” after all.

They could then blame it all on President Trump and his firm assertion of executive privilege in refusing to allow his top advisors, who might actually have some first-hand information about something relevant, to testify before Schiff’s clown show.

And then they could all go to the capitol basement and huddle up to work on their next false narrative designed to frame President Trump.

Of course, Nan and Bug-eyes aren’t clear-headed enough to do that, so the nation will be subjected to this clown show until it comes to a bitter end.

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

What is the Game with the Horowitz Report?

Today’s Campaign Update, Part II
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley is not a happy man. – The former Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee is understandably irritated about the seemingly endless delays in the process of getting the report on FISA abuse from DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz released to the public. Grassley made his concerns known in a tweet issued Tuesday afternoon:

Indeed, what is the game with this long-delayed report from an investigation that started more than 20 months ago in early 2018? The report has been rumored in the fake news media to be complete and ready for release since at least April of this year, yet we still have seen neither hide nor hair of it. Grassley’s reference to “next week when they said it would” is actually a reference to reports from Sara Carter and others claiming that their “sources” were telling them the report would be issued on or around November 18.

This is about the 600th “sourced” issue date for the report that Carter and others have rolled out on Sean Hannity’s radio and/or TV programs since April. Hannity himself has repeatedly claimed that his own “sources” were telling him the report was just bound to be released at some point every month for the last six months. And yet, here we sit, still without this supposedly crucial report.

And it only gets worse: Late Tuesday evening, the Associated Press issued a report that clearly tells us we won’t see this report next week, or the week after that, or anytime before at least early December. Here’s the key passage:

The inspector general in recent days has invited witnesses and their lawyers who were interviewed for the report to review portions of a draft this week and next, a critical final step toward making the document public, according to multiple people familiar with the process who insisted on anonymity to discuss it.

As part of that process, the people will have opportunities to raise concerns or suggest potential edits, making it unclear precisely when in the coming weeks a final version could be ready for release. Inspector General Michael Horowitz told Congress in a letter last month that he did not expect a lengthy review period and that he intended to make as much of the report public as possible, with minimal redactions.

Oh. It is “unclear precisely when in the coming weeks a final version could be ready for release.” Well, knock me over with a feather.

This witness review process could take a few weeks, or it could take months. It could even result in the release of the report being delayed until after Election Day 2020, at which time it could be safely quashed from ever seeing the light of day should a Democrat win the presidency.

Why? Because each and every one of these witnesses has a high-powered lawyer representing them, and those lawyers will no doubt employ every tactic for delay they can come up with, given that they are no doubt all loyal players whose livelihoods depend on the preservation of the DC Swamp and its corruption.

And presto! Just as if it were coordinated in advance, the reliable deep state mouth organ Washington Post issued its own report just hours after the AP report in which it claims that, while the timelines for some witness reviews have already been established, the timelines for others are “still being negotiated”:

Several witnesses have been scheduled or are in talks to review sections of the report dealing with their testimony in the next two weeks, the people said on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter.

Even better for the deep state, the witnesses can submit feedback, which could result in further delays and force additional “investigations”:

That could mean public release is imminent, though the witnesses will be allowed to submit feedback — which could spark more investigative work and slow down the process.

Oh. And guess what? Any additional investigative work might – just might – result in new revelations of wrongdoing, which would the result in the accused persons within the FBI and DOJ getting yet another lengthy bite at the apple to review the findings and provide their own “feedback,” which could in turn create the need for more investigative work and witness interviews and feedback and counterclaims and lawyer tactics and corrupt FBI demands for redactions and on and on and on and on ad nauseum.

Oh.

Here’s the lesson for Senator Grassley: You need to stop watching or listening to Sean Hannity and his gang of tick-tock monkeys. Sean Hannity has aired essentially the same hour of TV and three hours of radio five days a week for the past three years now. His incessant, repeated claims of “big revelations coming” that will be “devastating” and result in “multiple criminal referrals” and yada-yada-yada and blah-blah-blah have become the single most tiresome feature of our national news media.

So, to quote Sen. Grassley: “WHAT THE GAME IS?”

The game is delay. The game is being played by not only Horowitz himself, but by Christopher Wray, by Dana Boente, by other corrupt DOJ and FBI officials, by the felons who participated and still participate in the coup cabal, by the witnesses and their lawyers and their willing accomplices in the fake news media.

And here’s the biggest problem, Sen. Grassley: The game is also being played by your successor at the Judiciary Committee, your esteemed colleague Lindsey Graham. If you really are frustrated by all the delays, well, Sen. Graham has the power to convene a hearing and subpoena Horowitz, Wray, Boente and anyone else he wants to and ask them why they are playing this game.

Graham has in fact had that power for 10 months now and failed to convene a single hearing or issue a single subpoena related to this matter.

Tick-tock. Tick-tock. Tick-to…oh hell, nevermind.

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Politico Lays out the Deep State’s Strategy for Removing Trump From Office

Today’s Campaign Update, Part II
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

It generally isn’t all that hard to know what the hive mind of the Deep State collective is thinking: It’s usually easy to find laid out in detail in one of the reliable coordinating news organs. Most often, the platform of choice is either the New York Times or the Washington Post, but occasionally an alternative is chosen for this duty.

Today’s cooperating fake news platform of choice is the ever-reliable and increasingly transparent Politico, with former Bush/Cheney/McCain adviser Juleanna Glover serving as the nominal author. Under a headline that reads “There’s a Surprisingly Plausible Path to Removing Trump From Office,” Glover lays out a process for the GOP-dominated Senate to remove President Trump from office based on whatever fairy-tale impeachment articles the House sends over to them, by adopting the same hide-the-ball tactics used by Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi.

Such an approach no doubt sounds completely plausible to Ms. Glover and her fellow DC Swamp skunks and snakes, given that they have spent their entire careers devising ways to deceive the American public by hiding the pesky truth from them. After all, that was how both Bushes, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama conducted their entire presidencies for the 28 years between the departure of Ronald Reagan and the inauguration of Donald Trump; So hey, why not do this one more thing that way? If you’re successful, you might get another 28 years of uninterrupted globalist policies, by which time the American Republic would no doubt be well and truly dead.

Ms. Glover’s proposition is both elegant in its simplicity and stunning in its mendacity. Here is the first key passage:

By most everyone’s judgment, the Senate will not vote to remove President Donald Trump from office if the House impeaches him. But what if senators could vote on impeachment by secret ballot? If they didn’t have to face backlash from constituents or the media or the president himself, who knows how many Republican senators would vote to remove?

A secret impeachment ballot might sound crazy, but it’s actually quite possible. In fact, it would take only three senators to allow for that possibility.

See what I mean by elegant simplicity? Hey, it only takes three GOP Senators, and the obvious Usual Suspects are just staring us in the face right now, aren’t they? Those would be the same three GOP senators who refused to sign onto Lindsey Graham’s now-forgotten October resolution demanding the House hold a vote to launch a formal impeachment inquiry, something that still has not actually taken place.

Within a few days of its introduction, Graham’s resolution had received pledges to co-sponsor from 50 of the 53 Republican senators. The three holdouts were as predictable as the sun rising in the East: Mitt Romney, Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins. The three have differing reasons for their disloyalty – Romney is positioning himself to become the GOP’s “savior” should Trump be removed, Collins is up for re-election in 2020 in a very evenly-divided state, and Murkowski is just a classic transactional political skunk trying to leverage the President’s support for her latest energy bill – but the commonality is that they all maintain higher loyalties to their personal interests than to the well-being of the nation.

So, there are your three obvious holdouts, and no one should doubt their willingness to force any removal vote to be hidden from the public. Recognizing the skunkiness of her own proposal, Ms. Glover goes on to offer these senators her thin rationale for hiding the ball from the voting public:

During the last impeachment of a president, Bill Clinton, the rules were hammered out by Democrats and Republicans in a collaborative process, as then Senate leaders Trent Lott and Tom Daschle recently pointed out in a Washington Post op-ed. The rules passed unanimously. That’s unlikely this time, given the polarization that now defines our politics. McConnell and his fellow Republicans are much more likely to dictate the rules with little input from Democrats.

But, according to current Senate procedure, McConnell will still need a simple majority—51 of the 53 Senate Republicans—to support any resolution outlining rules governing the trial. That means that if only three Republican senators were to break from the caucus, they could block any rule they didn’t like. (Vice President Mike Pence can’t break ties in impeachment matters.) Those three senators, in turn, could demand a secret ballot and condition their approval of the rest of the rules on getting one.

Some might say transparency in congressional deliberations and votes is inviolable, and it’s true that none of the previous Senate impeachments have been conducted via secret ballot. But the Senate’s role in an impeachment is analogous to a U.S. jury, where secret ballots are often used. When Electoral College gridlock has resulted in the House picking the president—the House elected Thomas Jefferson in 1800 and John Quincy Adams in 1824—that vote has been secret. And, of course, when citizens vote for president, they do so in private.

See what I mean by stunning mendacity? ‘Yeah, every other impeachment/removal effort has been conducted above-board in and in public, but this one is different because…well because that’s what the DC Swamp wants, so let’s make up a bunch of irrelevant crap analogies to try to justify it. If all of our talking heads on TV will repeat these talking points often enough for long enough, why, the Big Lie principle devised by the Nazis ensure us they will eventually be accepted by the public as truth. Hey, it’s worked like a charm with “global warming,” hasn’t it?’

Then there’s this:

There’s already been some public speculation that, should the Senate choose to proceed with a secret ballot, Trump would be found guilty. GOP strategist Mike Murphy said recently that a sitting Republican senator had told him 30 of his colleagues would vote to convict Trump if the ballot were secret. Former Senator Jeff Flake topped that, saying he thought 35 Republican senators would vote that way.

Oh, hey, let’s trot out former Jeb Bush campaign adviser Mike Murphy and 18% public approval rating Jeff Flake – two of the most pathetic abject political failures of the Trump era – to lend further credibility to our evil plan. That should work!

Holy crap. You could never make these people up.

But wait, there’s more! Next, Glover, on behalf of the Deep State arrayed against him, literally advises the President of the United States to just give up and negotiate a deal. I’m not kidding:

While it’s unlikely Trump would support a secret ballot, it’s possible he might actually benefit from one in the long run. If a secret ballot is agreed on and Trump knows the prospect of impeachment is near, he could then focus his energies on his post-presidency. Once he leaves office, Trump faces multiple possible criminal investigations, at the federal, state and local level. He almost certainly knows that a President Pence could pardon him only for federal crimes. To avoid the prospect of serving time, Trump could negotiate a collective settlement—just as the Sackler family has done in the OxyContin matter—with all the jurisdictions now running independent investigations into his activities. Trump’s impeachment, followed by a quick resignation, might appease Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance’s and New York Attorney General Letitia James’s thirst for justice, making them more likely to agree to a deal.

Don’t you just love how this DC Swamp hack tosses in the names of Cyrus Vance, Jr., who refused to even investigate myriad accusations made against Harvey Weinstein – who happened to be a big campaign contributor – and Letitia James, who is the process of having her incompetence exposed in her fake case against ExxonMobil, to somehow bolster her case? Why, it’s almost as if the writer is as corrupt and incompetent as the prosecutors. Go figure.

But Glover isn’t done yet: There’s one more threat that must be issued to the key potential roadblock in her Deep State daydream:

Even McConnell might privately welcome the prospect of a secret ballot. He has always been intently focused on maintaining his Republican majority in the Senate. Trump’s approval numbers continue to languish, and support for impeachment has been rising. McConnell himself, facing reelection next year, has an approval rating of just 18 percent in Kentucky, not to mention that the Republican governor there just suffered a stunning upset in last week’s election. All of which suggests McConnell might warm to the possibility that he and his caucus could avoid a public up-or-down vote in defense of behavior by the president that’s looking increasingly indefensible.

Translated: ‘Hey, we stole the governor’s election for the Democrats when every other statewide office on the ballot ended up being a GOP landslide. How hard do you think it would be for us to get a Democrat elected to your senate seat, dude?’

So there you have it, folks: The DC Swamp strategery in a nutshell, complete with the most un-American propositions possible and barely-veiled threats to the key players. Of course, what Glover and her compatriots fail to consider is that this is not a strategy for saving the GOP from Trump: It is in fact a strategy that, if adopted, will inevitably result in the literal death of the Republican Party.

Make no mistake about it, if a Republican-majority Senate chaired by a Republican-appointed Chief Justice ends up removing Donald John Trump from the presidency based on the utterly absurd rationale being pushed by the Democrat/media clown show in the House, the President’s base supporters – who currently make up about 90% of the entire GOP base – will literally dismantle the party, brick by corrupt brick. There would be no going back from such a betrayal of the 63 million Americans who elected him in the first place and the millions more who have jumped onto the Trump Train since that glorious day three years ago.

In spite of that clear and unarguable reality, Ms. Glover, mouthpiece for the Deep State, ends her piece with this:

A secret ballot might get Trump out of office sooner than everyone expects: The sooner any three Republican senators make clear that they will support nothing short of a secret ballot, the sooner Trump realizes his best course could be to cut a deal, trading his office for a get-out-of-jail-free card—a clean slate from prosecutors—just as Vice President Spiro Agnew did. And if Trump were to leave office before the end of the year, there might even be enough time for Republicans to have a vibrant primary fight, resulting in a principled Republican as the nominee.

That, folks, is pretty much the most absurd thing you will ever read. This woman has a bright future writing fairy tales.

But don’t kid yourselves into thinking these people will not try to go down this road anyway. If you see Sen. McConnell start talking about how a secret ballot is just peachy-keen with him, you will know the fix is in.

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Alan Dershowitz: The Stalinist Democrats are Making up Crimes

Today’s Campaign Update
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

Those who dare speak the truth invariably become the first casualties of any communist revolution. – Alan Dershowitz, for those who do not know, is a very liberal longtime professor of constitutional law at Harvard University law school. For years following the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and subsequent dissolution of the Soviet Union, conservatives referred to Harvard Law School as the last bastion of communism on the face of the earth. That all ended early in the 21st century, as communism began making its comeback within the ranks of the Democrat Party.

But I digress. Back to Dershowitz.

For many years, Prof. Dershowitz was a frequent contributor for both CNN and Fox News. His appearances have now gone away for the most part as both cable news channels have shied away from airing the views of liberals who actually speak the truth about the never-ending coup mounted by the Democrat/media/deep state Axis of Disinformation. In fact, Dershowitz says he has has been banned entirely on CNN. Big surprise there.

But Dershowitz still finds his way into the media anyway. On Sunday, he appeared on the John Catsimatidis radio show  to talk about the fake impeachment circus being run by Adam Schiff and San Fran Nan. During the course of this interview, the longtime registered Democrat made some startling accusations about the current leaders of his Party, comparing them to Joseph Stalin and the head of Stalin’s KGB, Lavrentiy Beria.

Here is some of the transcript of that interview [emphasis added is mine]:

They’re very scary. They’re very frightening to any civil libertarian. Whether you’re a Democrat or Republican; whether you come from New York or the middle of the country, you should be frightened by efforts to try to create crimes out of nothing. The latest twist was people on television, particularly CNN and MSNBC, are saying that if the president or somebody else was to name the whistleblower in the Ukrainian situation, that person would be guilty of a crime. I said in the afternoon yesterday, searching the federal criminal statutes from beginning to end, I couldn’t find the crime.

It reminds me of Lavrentiy Beria, head of the KGB, said to Stalin, he said, “Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime.” Which he really meant, I’ll make up the crime.

And so the Democrats are now making up crimes. First they made up collusion. “Ahh! Collusion. It’s a crime!” I searched the statute books. There’s no crime of collusion except when businessmen get together to collude against the anti-trust laws, but no crime of collusion with a foreign country.

Then after that, they said “obstruction of Congress.”No, no, no, no, no. Obstruction of justice is a crime; obstruction of Congress is part of our system of checks and balances. If you get a subpoena from Congress, and you’re the president or in the executive department, and you think you have an executive privilege, you have an obligation not to respond. That’s not “obstruction of Congress,” that’s checks and balances under our Constitution.

So what we’re seeing, in a desperate effort to try to find crimes against President Trump: they’re just making it up. And that means we are all in danger, because if we can make up a crime — Congressman Cohen of Tennessee said that me and others who appear on Fox essentially were co-conspirators; we’re in on it. He’s now threatening people who are commentators, a liberal Democrat like me, who’s a commentator, that we’re in on it, that we’re co-conspirators. It is such a dangerous development to civil liberties.

The ACLU should be up in arms, but they’re silent.

[End]

Well, of course the ACLU is silent. The ACLU is just another Marxist organization dedicated to undermining the rule of law in the United States, a reality that Dershowitz can’t seem to bring himself to accept. The ACLU only weighs in to promote “freedoms” that serve to undermine the foundations of American liberty and freedom.

So, you won’t see this world-renowned law professor on CNN again, because CNN shares the same goals held by the ACLU. And you won’t see him on Fox News much, if at all, anymore, because those idiots are too busy promoting the rants of the pea-brained hack, Andrew Napolitano.

This is how things work in any communist society: The first thing you do is silence authority figures and experts who refuse to toe the party line. Once that has been accomplished, the media outlets all know that the next step is to silence any journalists who facilitate the airing of those contrarian views.

Management at CNN has spent the last four years systematically ridding its airwaves of all liberal authority figures who dare to speak any truth about the Democrat Party, replacing them all with more cookie-cutter talking points monkeys. The current management at Fox News is now going about doing the same, getting rid of Dershowitz and other liberal truth-tellers and replacing them with talking points monkeys like the nitwit Marie Harf and the corrupt Donna Brazile.

We should fully expect the great Mollie Hemingway to become the next casualty of the Fox purge. Hemingway has been a frequent contributor on Fox for years now, but as we noted yesterday at the Campaign Update, she broke Fox’s idiotic wall of omerta against speaking the name of fake whistleblower Eric Ciaramella on-air on Sunday. The cable channel’s leftist management will now come under pressure from their peers to either punish Hemingway or face not being invited to all the best cocktail and dinner parties on the Upper East Side for the foreseeable future.

And you know how the rich, white lefties are about their cocktail and dinner parties: Prof. Dershowitz hasn’t been invited to one in years.

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

Open post

Thanks, Democrats: Impeachment Gives us the Creepy Child Porn Lawyer

Today’s Campaign Update
(Because The Campaign Never Ends)

First, the Democrats and their corrupt media toadies gave us the Creepy Porn Lawyer; now, they give us the Creepy Child Porn Lawyer. – Mark Zaid, the lawyer for Eric Ciaramella, Adam Schiff’s fake whistleblower, is a very strange man. Since he decided to make himself a public figure last week in his illegitimate defense of his seditious client’s mythical “right to anonymity,” enterprising individuals have dug up all manner of really odd stuff about him, thanks to his habit of mouthing off on social media accounts at Twitter and Instagram.

Thanks to those efforts, we now know the following stuff about Mr. Zaid, some of which has already been reported at the Campaign Update:

He started bragging about his role in the ongoing coup d’etat effort just 10 days after Donald Trump was inaugurated to the Presidency;

He has used his social media accounts over the last three years to solicit fake “whistleblowers,” making him sort of a digital treasonous ambulance chaser;

He likes to visit DisneyWorld alone and take pictures of himself hanging out with all the cartoon characters and very young girls who play the princesses there;

Image result for mark zaid disney princess photos

He likes watching Disney Girl videos on his YouTube channel:

And, perhaps the coup de gras of his involvement in this whole coup d’etat, he actually put up this tweet in 2018:

So, he’s proud to have helped get pedophiles embedded within our federal bureaucracy, complete with security clearances.

There seem to be several patterns forming up here related to this guy, and none of them are pretty. Given this ugly portfolio, can there be any doubt at all that Mr. Zaid, esq. will end up with a very big contributor’s contract with CNN in the very near future?

You just can’t make these people up, folks. You really, truly can’t.

That is all.

 

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

 

Posts navigation

1 2 3
Scroll to top
%d bloggers like this: