Open post

Ted Cruz: “DOJ MUST Ensure” Ghislaine Maxwell Remains Among the Living

Let’s make sure all those security cameras are actually turned on this time, hmmmm? – Texas Senator Ted Cruz laid down a bar for Attorney General William Barr and his people to meet in the case involving Ghislaine Maxwell this morning:

Note the quotes Cruz places around the phrase “hang himself” – clearly communicating that he shares our skepticism about the official government story around the killing of Jeffrey Epstein while in federal custody last year.

Keeping Maxwell safe likely will indeed be a challenge given that a convenient case of “COVID-19” has been added to the list of ways she could be offed or find her demise. Why, who wouldn’t believe it if she were to suddenly grow very ill and be unable to fight off a virus with a mortality rate of somewhere around 1/2 of 1 percent, a rate that continues to go lower with each passing day of grossly inflated “case” numbers being reported by hospitals around the country?

If you believe social media, the BBC and probably other media outlets are already testing their future stories and headlines about poor Ghislaine’s fight against the viral gift from China:

Image

Folks on Twitter are swearing that story really did momentarily go up at the BBC’s website today, although I can’t vouch for that. But would it surprise you?

Think about the names of the powerful people who are threatened by Maxwell’s status as a federal prisoner who might start singing like a canary any day in order to avoid spending life in the pokey:

Bill and Hillary Clinton

Prince Andrew of Britain

Billionaire Mike Bloomberg

Bill Gates

Some guy named John Roberts who may or may not be the same John Roberts currently serving as chief justice of the Supreme Court

These are but a few of the hundreds of very prominent and extremely wealthy people who have been rumored to be pals with convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. Epstein himself, remember, lasted less than a month before he very conveniently committed “suicide” by executing a maneuver to hang himself in his cell that in reality would have been physically impossible.

While Epstein was the principal in the pedophilia and sex-trafficking ring, Maxwell was the facilitator and thus, no less a threat to Epstein’s clientele.

The Daily Caller reports today that one of Epstein’s, ahem, ‘business associates’ is telling anyone who will listen that the FBI has known of Maxwell’s whereabouts for months and that he expects she will “snap in two seconds” at the prospect of spending years in prison:

“They knew where she was all the time [in New Hampshire],” Hoffenberg told the publication. “It was a question if America was going to take the case or not, now America has made up its mind to take the case.”

Hoffenberg reportedly maintains contact with Maxwell’s spokesperson, and told the Sun that Maxwell did not think she would be arrested. (RELATED: FBI Knew Of Allegations Against Ghislaine Maxwell As Early As 1996, Accuser Says. It Took 24 Years To Arrest Her)

“If they keep her in prison, she’ll crack in two seconds,” he said. “She’s not able to take that sort of cruel punishment, prison is too tough and hard, she’ll have to be in solitary confinement, and she’ll snap.”

“She’s going to cooperate and be very important,” he added, before noting that her words might implicate high profile people including the UK’s Prince Andrew. “Andrew may be very concerned, and there’s a lot of people very worried, a lot of powerful people been named [in the scandal], and she knows everything.”

[End]

Senator Cruz understands what the deal is here, and he wants Attorney General Barr to understand that. Honestly, if Maxwell dies mysteriously in prison in the coming weeks, then those of us who have been sitting quietly as America’s cities have been looted and burned might need to do some burning and rioting of our own.

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

Friday News Roundup: Tulsa Curfew, Portland Chaos, CBS Wants a Race War and Hating John Bolton

Tulsa’s Mayor starts prepping for a riot. – With reports flying around about Antifa and Black Lives Matter already busing in out-of-state agitators to stage riots in his city this Saturday, Republican Tulsa Mayor G.T. Bynum declared a state of emergency Thursday and established a 10:00 p.m. curfew that will remain in effect through Saturday.

Twitter predictably erupted with howls of outrage about the hundreds of Trump supporters who have been camping out at the rally site since Monday being forced to move, but the Mayor’s action here is entirely rational.

As a part of his declaration, Mayor Bynum states that ““I have received information from the Tulsa Police Department and other law enforcement agencies that shows that individuals from organized groups who have been involved in destructive and violent behavior in other States are planning to travel to the city of Tulsa for purposes of causing unrest in and around the rally.”

This move by these two Soros-funded domestic terrorist groups to create what will almost certainly become riots without firm police control is entirely predictable. I’d have frankly been stunned if they didn’t engage in this behavior – it’s right out of the Soros/Alinsky/Democrat Party playbook.

In the emergency declaration, the Mayor declares that the implementation of the curfew is necessary so that his police department has time today and tomorrow to properly secure the area around the downtown arena in order to create the best conditions for the prevention of the rioting, looting and burning that we have seen in Democrat-controlled cities all over the country in recent weeks.

Bottom line: This is what responsible mayors do when they know that outside agitators are coming into their city to stage riots. Instead of whining about this move on Twitter, Trump fans should be celebrating the fact that the people of Tulsa have been smart enough to avoid putting Democrats in control of their city.

This is what they want to do to the Washington Monument and Jefferson Memorial. – Meanwhile, in the Democrat-run city of Portland , Oregon, chaos continues to reign. Take a look at this:

Do not doubt that they would love to do the same to the monuments in Washington, DC. Antifa and Black Lives Matter have in recent weeks distributed flyers to their supporters that include instructions on ways to undermine the foundation of the Washington Monument to cause it to topple over just as this statue was toppled last night.  These people are indistinguishable from ISIS and the Taliban with their goals of erasing history and the monuments to it.

“CBS wants a race war.” – That was the statement made by Caleb Hull yesterday, but he might as well have included pretty much every corrupt national news outlet. Here’s the tweet:

Hull was reacting to an extremely and intentionally misleading headline published by CBS News yesterday describing an incident in which white police officers shot another black man. Here’s an excerpt from a story in the DC Examiner about it:

CBS News drew criticism Wednesday for a headline on a story involving police shooting and killing a black man without mentioning the man allegedly opened fire first.

“Deputies kill half-brother of black man found hanged in park,” a CBS headline posted on Twitter Wednesday read, referring to the death of Terron Jammal Boone.

Boone was the half-brother of Robert Fuller, a black man found hanging in a park on June 10 in what was first believed to be a suicide before the coroner walked back that conclusion.

The tweet doesn’t include the police report that states officers attempted to stop Boone, who was wanted for kidnapping, spousal assault, and assault with a deadly weapon, at which point he jumped out of his vehicle and opened fire on officers before they shot and killed him.

[End]

As is so often the case, it isn’t what an evil, corrupt news outlet did say that’s the problem so much as what it left out.

The fake, corrupt news media is an existential threat to our nation’s survival. This CBS headline/story is but one of a thousand examples we see of this with every passing week.

In case you missed it… – Chief Justice John Roberts betrayed America once again yesterday, siding with the liberal minority on the court in yet another atrocity of a 5-4 decision DACA. Read all about it at this link.

So, you hate John Bolton? Welcome to the party, pal. – Everyone in Washington hates John Bolton. At least, that’s what the very lefist folks at Politico are telling us this morning in a very interesting expose’ on the feckless warmonger who is hawking a new book this week.

Here’s an excerpt:

John Bolton has few friends left in D.C.

A day after excerpts from his bombshell new book emerged excoriating President Donald Trump, the former national security adviser has managed to turn everyone against him.

Republicans say he’s a disgruntled sensationalist who’s merely trying to make money off his book. And Democrats, once buoyed by Bolton’s turn against Trump, now say he is “unpatriotic” for documenting his claims in a book rather than testifying before Congress during Trump’s impeachment inquiry.

Several Republicans this week took direct shots at Bolton, a neoconservative once heralded as the gold standard for the GOP on foreign policy and national security issues.

Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) said Bolton is “somebody who thought he was being hired to be the commander in chief, and he wasn’t.” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said he found it hard to take seriously “anyone who claims to have witnessed treason and obstruction of justice and tells about it in a book.”

“Every meeting I’ve been in with John Bolton, he views himself as the smartest person in the room,” added Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), the No. 3 GOP leader. “He thinks he should be president, speaker of the House and chief justice of the Supreme Court all at the same time.”

[End]

Nobody likes a lying warmonger, it seems. That appears to be the only thing both parties can get together on these days.

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

The Evening Wrap: John Roberts Betrays America Again

Dick Cheney was trending on Twitter today, so I had to go figure out why. So often, a famous person’s name trends on that social media platform when they say something stupid or die, and either was certainly possible with the ex-Vice President, who has dealt with major heart issues for twenty-plus years.

As it turned out, Cheney was trending due to this presidential tweet:

The term “shotgun blasts” of course brings to mind Cheney’s infamous South Texas bird hunting hunting incident in which Cheney blasted attorney Harry Whittington in the face with his own shotgun. The incident inspired unending conspiracy theories, but all involved claimed it was an accident.

President Trump of course was referring to today’s latest judicial atrocity authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, who sided in a completely incoherent decision with the liberal minority in ruling that Barack Obama’s executive order on DACA is apparently now unassailable law.  Ok, it didn’t go that far, but the court did rule that President Trump cannot immediately rescind Obama’s order because – get this – the administration did not provide adequate justification for doing so.

Thus does Roberts demonstrate his clearly compromised status one more time, joining the court’s liberal wing in usurping the roles of both the legislative and executive branches of government. Conveniently, Roberts’ decision does not advise the administration as to what it means by “inadequate,” meaning this political football could just go back and forth for years to come.

In his dissent, Clarence Thomas noted the grossly political nature of this decision in blunt terms:

“Today’s decision must be recognized for what it is: an effort to avoid a politically controversial but legally correct decision,” Justice Thomas wrote. “The court could have made clear that the solution respondents seek must come from the legislative branch.”

“In doing so,” he wrote, “it has given the green light for future political battles to be fought in this court rather than where they rightfully belong — the political branches.”

“Without any purported delegation of authority from Congress and without undertaking a rulemaking, DHS unilaterally created a program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA),” he wrote, adding later that the program was implemented “without statutory authority and without following the [Administrative Procedures Act’s] required procedures.”

“Then-Attorney General Sessions correctly concluded that this ultra vires program should be rescinded. These cases could—and should—have ended with a determination that his legal conclusion was correct,” Thomas said. “Without grounding its position in either the APA or precedent, the majority declares that DHS was required to overlook DACA’s obvious legal deficiencies and provide additional policy reasons and justifications before restoring the rule of law.”

Thomas also said that even though the reason DHS gave for the rescinding the policy — that DACA was not done under the proper legal authority — was more than enough, it wasn’t even required to do that.

“Nothing in the APA suggests that DHS was required to spill any ink justifying the rescission of an invalid legislative rule, let alone that it was required to provide policy justifications beyond acknowledging that the program was simply unlawful from the beginning,” he said.

The justice said that DACA “fundamentally altered the immigration laws,” creating “a new category of aliens who, as a class, became exempt from statutory removal procedures and it gave those aliens temporary lawful presence.”

[End]

So, one more in a growing line of atrocious decisions in which Roberts plays turncoat. With Gorsuch also increasingly looking to be a replay of Anthony Kennedy, the GOP record of getting supreme court appointments about 50% right remains in place.

Pray for Trump’s re-election, because he’ll need at least two more tries to save the country from these despots in black robes.

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

Saturday News Roundup: Trump Fires WHO, Russia Hoax Dead, Roberts Goes Rogue Again

Today’s Campaign Update, Part II

Trump to WHO: You’re Fired! – President Donald Trump, outraged at the role the WHO played in helping China’s communist government conceal the real nature of the Wuhan Virus for several months, took final action with that corrupt globalist organization on Friday, completely removing the United States from its membership:

“China has total control over the World Health Organization despite only paying $40 million per year compared to what the United States has been paying, which is approximately $450 million a year,” Trump said during a news conference in the White House Rose Garden.

“The world needs answers from China on the virus. We must have transparency. Why is it that China shut off infected people from Wuhan to all other parts of China?” he added. “It didn’t go to Beijing, it went nowhere else, but they allowed them to freely travel throughout the world, including Europe and the United States.”

Naturally, RINO limp-wrists like Lamar Alexander were upset and disturbed by the move, because of course they were.

But then, WHO cares what they think? (See what I did there?)

The Russia Hoax breathes its last, dying gasp. – Thanks to the efforts of Ric Grenell and new Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe, the Russia Hoax is now in hospice care, breathing its last, desperate breaths.

As promised, DNI Ratcliffe released the full transcripts and FBI summaries of the various calls General Mike Flynn conducted with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak during the 2016 transition period. His action came after Grenell had fully declassified the documents early this week. The calls show exactly what we should have expected: An incoming National Security Advisor holding calls with his Russian counterpart and having preliminary discussions on areas of mutual interest between our two countries.

The December 29, 2016 call that the Obama Coup Cabal and its corrupt media support group have claimed to be so concerning turns out to be a big nothing burger. During that call, when Kislyak raises the likelihood of Russia responding to Obama’s earlier expulsion of dozens of Russian “diplomats”, i.e., spies, Flynn advises him exactly as John F. Kennedy advised Nikita Kruschev during the Cuban Missile Crisis: to avoid ‘going nuclear’, and to respond in a “reciprocal” manner.

Naturally, the corrupt news media that has spent the last 4 solid years pushing the Russia hoax is today trying to convince you all that Flynn’s reply here is some sort of treasonous act. That is, of course, utterly absurd.

There is nothing wrong with that call, and we now know with 100% certainty that the Obama Administration – including Obama himself – went after Flynn for the simple fact that Flynn knows where all the bodies are buried with relation to Obama’s efforts to prop up Iran. Those corrupt bastards sold their souls and our national security to the Islamic state, and they could not countenance having Flynn as Trump’s National Security Advisor.

The most poignant part of reading the transcripts is that we see Flynn and Kislyak discussing the very real areas of mutual interest the U.S. and Russia had at the time related to destroying ISIS, stabilizing Syria and dealing with the Iranian threat. By mounting the Russia hoax, the Obama Coup Cabal and its media support team threw all of that potential good away, making it impossible for the Trump Administration to truly engage with Russia on those matters, and making our nation less secure in the name of protecting Obama, John Kerry and everyone else involved in the Iran deal.

This must not go unpunished. The Russia Hoax is dead, and it is now time for William Barr and John Durham to start extracting some justice.

Meet John Roberts, the new Anthony Kennedy. – Just when Americans all over the country are getting ready to go back to church, Chief Justice John Roberts decides to side with the communists.

In a 5-4 decision late Friday evening, Roberts sided with the four “liberal” – as the corrupt media likes to call them – justices in upholding the draconian, science-devoid restrictions on religious freedom being imposed by California Governor Gavin Newsom. Here’s the key passage from the decision:

Although California’s guidelines place restrictions on
places of worship, those restrictions appear consistent with
the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. Similar
or more severe restrictions apply to comparable secular
gatherings, including lectures, concerts, movie showings,
spectator sports, and theatrical performances, where large
groups of people gather in close proximity for extended periods of time. And the Order exempts or treats more leniently only dissimilar activities, such as operating grocery
stores, banks, and laundromats, in which people neither
congregate in large groups nor remain in close proximity for
extended periods.

[End]

Thus does the majority of the U.S. Supreme Court uphold dramatic restrictions on the absolute freedom of religion guaranteed in the First Amendment by equating your church, synagogue, temple or mosque to the local Kiwanis Club.

If you are not outraged by this, I really don’t know what to say to you.

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

The Coronavirus Lies Just Keep on Coming

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

This is very revealing. – Check out this little video clip from Chicago. Corrupt Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot has just finished up holding her latest briefing, during which she and all of the reporters in the room dutifully wore their masks while they knew the TV cameras were rolling. As the presser ends, everyone immediately takes off their masks, as several reporters approach Lightfoot to ask a few more questions.

They just didn’t know the camera was still running. Watch how closely they crowd around the Mayor with their masks off. Does that look like social distancing to you?

What does this tell you? It tells you that neither the mayor nor the reporters believe any of the ongoing fear porn they are all spreading to the public in unison.

You can be sure that exactly the same thing takes place in the White House press room as soon as the briefings are done. Early this week, Fox Reporter John Roberts was outed by Jonathan Karl of ABC, who circulated a photo on Twitter of Roberts seated at an outdoor assembly sans mask a few minutes before the briefing was to begin. Roberts put his mask on as soon as the briefing began, but why? What possible purpose did doing that serve? What possible purpose did Karl’s pedantic tweet serve, other than the spreading of a little more fear porn?

At a presidential briefing on Friday, Dr. Anthony Fauci showed up – despite his dramatic “self-quarantine” announcement early in the week – and stood behind the President the entire time wearing a mask that covered not just his face, but all the way down to the base of his neck. He looked like a member of the freaking James Gang.

Fauci had said he would still be coming into the White House when necessary, but why did he feel it was necessary to stand behind the President without saying a word for an hour at that presser? Was that really – as all the despot politicians like to say – “essential?” Or was it just so he could be there in every shot, subtly spreading his fear porn?

Because that’s all it is. Fauci himself has on numerous occasions advised the President and told the media that wearing these masks serves no functional purpose in terms of preventing the spread of the Wuhan Virus. So has Dr. Deborah Birx. Remember that? It was back in March, into early April.

But as he has done on so many things over the course of the past four months, Fauci suddenly switched course in April, as his fear-mongering efforts to keep extending our national economic shut-down stretched out from two weeks to six weeks to indefinite and now until there is a vaccine or a “cure,” either or both of which may never come. Around the first week of April, he and Birx suddenly began including the wearing of masks by anyone who goes out into public as one of the mitigations we need to all take as a condition of slowly reopening the economy.

Why?  It’s obviously false advice and all the politicians everyone in the press corps parroting Fauci’s pronouncements knows it, which is why we saw that scene from Chicago yesterday. They all know it, and as soon as they think the cameras have stopped rolling – or, in Roberts’ case, before he thinks they’ve begun – presto! No more masks.

We’re all being lied to, folks. We’re being lied to over and over again about pretty much every aspect of this Chinese plague.

To its credit, the state health department of Colorado yesterday actually made an effort to begin correcting one of its great lies to the public, lowering its official COVID-related death count from 1150 to 878 as auditors identified 272 cases that were falsely reported.

That announcement ironically came just a few hours after the state’s Democrat Governor, Jared Polis, had somberly announced that the state had passed the milestone of 1,000 deaths. Guess he’ll have to do that announcement all over again in the weeks to come. Or maybe not, since the review of the death count by the state’s health board is ongoing.

This is just one more aspect of all of this that health officials, politicians and the corrupt news media are lying about, and everyone involved knows it. It was an act of compassion, but the decision by the federal government, working with the big insurance companies, to ensure that COVID-19 treatments are free of charge led to a frenzy by doctors and health officials all over the country to attribute almost any death by natural causes to the virus, even when patients had not been tested for it. That 25% reduction in Colorado is just the tip of a huge iceberg, and again, everyone involved knows it.

Yet the media and Democrat politicians continue to use that hyper-inflated death toll as fear porn to support their efforts to keep the economy shut down through election day. With the media, it’s not just what they do say on this subject, but what they don’t report about it.

If you do a Google search on that Colorado story, you won’t find reports on it from any of the major TV networks, CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times or the Washington Post. But you will find a 3-week old story from the NY Times whose headline reads “U.S. Coronavirus Death Toll is Far Higher Than Reported.” I swear I do not make this stuff up.

We’re being lied to, folks, just as we have been lied to for four solid years about “Russia Collusion.” It’s all the Democrats and their corrupt media toadies know how to do anymore.

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

Ted Cruz Sends Some Shots Across Multiple Bows in Fox News Interview

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

Texas Senator Ted Cruz appeared in a pre-recorded interview with Maria Bartiromo on Sunday Morning Futures yesterday. In his segment, the Senator lays out how he expects the Senate impeachment trial will proceed, including his clear expectation that the trial will begin “in early January.” So, Sen. Cruz either expects that San Fran Nan Pelosi will relent in her idiotic tactic of withholding the Houses’s imbecilic articles of impeachment, or that Mitch McConnell will simply deem the articles to have been transmitted to the Senate and proceed without her. Oh, how I do hope it will be the latter scenario.

Regardless, a clip of the interview appears below, followed by a verbatim transcript of the Senators remarks:

 

For those who still prefer to read stuff, here is a Transcript:

Bartiromo: Senator, it is always a pleasure to see you.

Sen. Cruz: Good to be with you, Maria, thank you.

Bartiromo: So, Nancy Pelosi said, after the impeachment, that maybe she will sit on the articles of impeachment before sending it over to you and your colleagues in the Senate. Can she do that?

Sen. Cruz: [Laughing] You know, you can’t make this up. Listen, I think this is a sign of weakness. This is a sign she understands just how weak these articles are. These articles of impeachment that they actually voted on were really an admission of failure.

The House Democrats haven’t even alleged any ‘high crimes and misdemeanors,’ much less proven any. And so now, Pelosi is in a situation where she knows that when it goes to the Senate there’s going to be a fair trial, we’re going to give both sides the opportunity to present their case, we’re going to protect due process. But she also knows that the result of a fair trial is that these impeachment claims are going to be thrown out, because they haven’t met the constitutional standard.

Bartiromo: Would you want to see witnesses in a Senate trial?

Sen. Cruz: I would, but let me tell you how I think it’s likely to play out. The trial will start in early January. It will start with the Chief Justice of the United States swearing in all 100 senators.

It will then shift to the House managers presenting their case – that’ll probably take several days. They’ll stand up, they’ll present evidence, they’ll make arguments.

Then it will shift to the White House, to the defense team for the President making their case. The President’s going to have a full and fair opportunity to defend himself.

It then will shift to questions. Now, here’s where it’s a little weird. I think some people, having seen what happened in the House, they’re expecting in the Senate to see a bunch of Senators asking questions. Well, the Senate impeachment rules prohibit any Senator from speaking in open session, in other words, when the TV cameras are on.

You’re not gonna see Elizabeth Warren and me going 15 rounds on the Senate floor because that’s not allowed. We’re both gonna be sitting quietly at our desks. Now, we can submit questions, but the questions have to be in writing. We can write out the questions, we hand them down, and the Chief Justice asks the questions from the senators.

I think at that point, we are likely to recess and have a discussion. I think one of two things will happen:

One, it is possible that a majority of the Senate will be prepared [to say], let’s move forward, let’s vote, they haven’t met their threshold, they haven’t come close, let’s reject these claims. I think that’s an outcome that could happen.

Secondly, there could well be a procedural fight. Do we need more evidence? Do we need more witnesses? In which case, that question is decided by 51 senators.  Every legal question, the Chief Justice can rule in the first instance, but the Chief Justice can be overruled by 51 senators.

I think John Roberts is very likely to follow the Rhenquist precedent and just defer the procedural questions to the Senate, which means if 51 Republicans agree, we can resolve any legal issue. And to me, that means if the President wants to call Hunter Biden, if the President wants to call the Whistleblower, due process mandates that we allow the President to defend himself, to make his case.

And so, I think we should do so. But, that’s a decision in the first place for the White House and his legal team.

Bartiromo: Based on what you know today, do you expect any Republicans to vote to impeach [remove] in the Senate?

Sen. Cruz: You know, I don’t. It is certainly possible, and there are a couple that could vote that way. But I think anyone voting on the facts, anyone voting on the law, this is a very easy vote.

What they have alleged is not a ‘high crime or misdemeanor.’ There are two articles:

The first article is just this amorphous ‘abuse of power’, which, by the way, is ‘mal-administration.’ It’s literally the term that was rejected in the Constitutional Convention. That’s what they’re alleging. That plainly does not meet the Constitutional threshold.

The second article, though, is orders of magnitude weaker. The second article is ‘obstruction of congress,’ and interestingly enough, people are used to obstruction of justice…

Bartiromo: …Yeah, I’ve never heard of that, of ‘obstruction of congress,’ but I’ve heard of obstruction of power, or obstruction of justice…”

Sen. Cruz: Well, and obstruction of justice is a real crime, it’s a felony, it’s a serious felony…

Bartiromo: …But they have named it ‘obstruction of congress…’

Sen. Cruz:Because they couldn’t prove obstruction of justice. By the way, Bill Clinton was impeached on obstruction of justice; Richard Nixon was going to be impeached on obstruction of justice. But they couldn’t prove obstruction of justice.

The basis for their so-called ‘obstruction of congress’ claim is that the President and aides in the executive asserted privileges. That’s it.

For example, when they wanted John Bolton to testify – John Bolton, National Security Advisor to the President – his lawyer went to a federal district court and said, the House has asked me to testify, the White House is asserting executive privilege: Your honor, what do I do? Judge, I’ve got two conflicting demands here: I will do what you tell me to do.

You know what the House Democrats did? They said, ‘nevermind.’ They just backed away. They didn’t subpoena Bolton, they didn’t litigate it.

Remember, the Nixon case was litigated all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. The U.S. Supreme Court, at the end of the day, ordered the Nixon White House to hand over the White House tapes, and I think two days later, Nixon resigned. That’s how you actually fight these matters.

The House Democrats didn’t do that. Instead, their assertion is that simply claiming the privilege is an impeachable offense. If that were true, all 45 presidents going back to George Washington, every one of them would have committed impeachable offenses. That’s just laughable.

Bartiromo: This is a new precedent – it sure is.

[End]

Now, the thing to remember about Ted Cruz is that he is truly a Constitutional scholar. As a former Solicitor General of Texas, Senator Cruz argued nine cases before the U.S. Supreme Court. He understands the Constitution and he understands better than most current Senators the rules and laws surrounding impeachment and removal of a President.

Cruz and the other 52 GOP senators have also spent much of the past two weeks in meetings and calls with Majority Leader Mitch McConnell in an apparently successful effort to reach consensus on how to conduct the Senate trial. So, when Cruz states flatly that he expects the trial to begin “in early January,” that statement carries a lot of weight, and might indeed mean that Leader McConnell plans to convene the trial regardless of Pelosi’s cynical tactics.

I personally think that Cruz’s reminder that any procedural decision initially made by our very unreliable Chief Justice can be overruled by 51 Republican votes is meant as a shot across Justice Roberts’ bow. It is likely an indication that Cruz is confident that there are at least 51 GOP senators who are tired of this crap dragging on for weeks on end, and who are intent upon bringing it to as fast a conclusion as possible.  If that is the case, then Justice Roberts might want to avoid embarrassing himself by being overruled by 51 senators, and just play the case straight.

This interview, and the messages Senator Cruz – who remember, was Donald Trump’s chief competitor for the 2016 GOP nomination and who still harbors presidential ambitions of his own – sends within it, are a very important marker in the impeachment debate. This was not just a courtesy interview by the Senator, and that’s good news for America.

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

Mitch McConnell Goes All Broadway Joe Namath With Hannity

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

Mitch McConnell made a fairly rare, long-ish appearance on the Sean Hannity Tick-Tock hour last night. – The Senate Majority Leader made a lot of very important statements during this interview, including an ironclad guarantee – a la Joe Willie Namath before the 1968 Super Bowl – that there is “zero chance” the President will be convicted and removed by the Senate. Given that the media reports I’ve seen on it are woefully inadequate, I thought it was important to provide readers here a more fulsome summation of the interview.

Because the segment is almost 11 minutes long and the video clip provides closed captioning, I haven’t compiled a full transcript. However, key outtakes – which constitute virtually all of his own remarks – from McConnell’s remarks appear below.

[Apologies to readers: This video clip, for whatever reason, will not play when embeded within this piece, so please follow the link provided above to view it.]

Key Outtakes:

The Democrats have been wanting to do this for three years. The first headline in the Washington Post after the President was inaugurated was that they were going to impeach him. Well, they finally got around to it, and we assume we will see two articles of impeachment, both of them pretty weak stuff, coming over to us.

Under the rules of impeachment, the Senate then turns to it – has no option, but to turn to it – and it’s the sole business until we finish.

How we can impact that, really, is just with 51 votes. The Chief Justice is in the Chair, I don’t expect the Chief Justice to try to tilt the playing field either way. We will listen to the opening arguments by the House prosecutors, we will listen to the President’s lawyers respond, and then we’ll have to make a decision about the way forward.

Everything I do while we’re doing this will be coordinated with the White House counsel. There will be no difference between the President’s position and our position as to how to handle this, to the extent we can.

We don’t have the kind of ball control on this…a typical issue, for example, comes over from the house, and if I don’t like it, we don’t take it up. We have no choice but to take it up, but we’ll be working through this process, hopefully in a very short period of time in close cooperation with the White House counsel’s office.

You raise the issue of whether there will be witnesses; It will be up to the President’s counsel to decide if they want to have witnesses.

The case is so darn weak coming over from the House – we all know how it’s gonna end. There is no chance the President’s gonna be removed from office.

My hope is that there won’t be a single Republican who votes for either of these articles of impeachment, and Sean, it wouldn’t surprise me if we got one or two Democrats.

Over in the House, the Republicans are solid and the Democrats seem to be divided.

[On the Obstruction of Congress charge:]

This is a thoroughly political exercise. This is not like a courtroom experience, this is a political exercise. They’ve been trying to do this for three years, they’ve finally screwed up their courage to do it.

It looks to me like it may be backfiring on them, particularly in swing districts that the Speaker’s party managed to win in order to get to the majority. Most of the nervousness I see on this issue, particularly among the politicians since it’s a political exercise, is on the Democratic side.

[On whether to bring in witnesses like Schiff, Quid Pro Joe and Hunter Biden:]

Again, I’m going to take my cues from the President’s lawyers.

But, yes, if you know you have the votes, you’ve listened to the arguments on both sides, and believe the case is so slim, so weak that you have the votes to end it, that might be what the President’s lawyers would prefer.

You can certainly make a case for making it shorter rather than longer since it’s such a weak case.

[On the Abuse of Power charge:]

Well, this is a really weak case [laughing], and that’s why I think you’re gonna see bipartisan opposition to the articles over in the House.

[How long will it last?]

Well, if they do it [pass the articles in the House] next week, we will get consent to go home for Christmas. We would turn to it right around the first of the year, and we would stay on it until we finish. My hope is that it would be a shorter process rather than a longer process.

[On his and President Trump’s tremendous success on Judicial confirmations:]

It’s all about putting strict constructionists on the court. We put our 50th Circuit judge on the bench last week.

To put that into perspective, Barack Obama did 55 Circuit judges in 8 years, we’ve done 50 in 3 years. We have at least a year left for sure, we’re gonna do more.

One-fourth of the Circuit judges…remember, the most cases don’t make it to the Supreme Court. Most complex litigation never makes it beyond the Circuit court. This has been the most long-lasting, important contribution the President could make, well into the future, far beyond his tenure in office.

So, we’ll have a judiciary more inclined not to make it up on the fly. You know, President Obama said he wanted to appoint judges who had ’empathy.’ Well, that makes great sense if you’re the litigant before the judge for whom the judge has empathy. Its not so good if you aren’t.

[On how Mitch would proceed if a Supreme Court seat came open next year.]

Absolutely [he would proceed to fill the seat]. We definitely would do that. 

The most important decision I have made in my career was the decision not to fill the seat of Justice Scalia after he had passed away. That was the beginning, and now we have this exclamation point after three years.

[Hannity says he’s surprised Obama left so many vacancies.]

I’ll tell you why – I was in charge of what we did the last two years of the Obama Administration [laughs].

[Will there be any GOP defections on impeachment?]

I doubt it. There’s zero chance the President would be removed from office, and I’m hoping there will be no defections at all.

[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

A Tale of Two Court Decisions: One Legitimate, One Not

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

The increasingly unreliable Bret Baier led off his evening news report on Monday with a breathless report on a just-released decision issued by a Washington-based federal judge that would, if upheld on appeal, legitimize the Democrats’ fake impeachment process in the House of Representatives and force White House counsel Don McGhan to testify before Bug-eyes Schiff’s clown show committee.

Every corrupt “news” outlet in the fake media establishment followed Baier’s report with breathless reports of their own, all containing headlines or opening statements with some variation of “Judge says McGhan MUST TESTIFY.” The only trouble with those headlines is that is not at all the likely outcome of that case.

You have to read all the way down to the 8th paragraph of the report by Politico which I linked above to discover that the Department of Justice immediately announced it would appeal this ruling, a fact that should be the lead on these stories since the judge in this case – Ketanji Brown Jackson – is just another Obama appointee who has issued just another clearly unconstitutional decision.

Her decision will almost certainly be overturned by the appellate court, and if it isn’t, it will definitely be overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court early next year. This is because the effort by Democrats to force the President’s immediate advisors to testify is a clear and unambiguous effort to pierce the veil of executive privilege, a blatant violation of the separation of powers between the two branches of government.

The chances of McGhan ever testifying before Schiff’s clown show lie somewhere between slim and none, and Slim just rode out of town.

But there was a second, truly legitimate decision issued minutes after Jackson’s Obama fraud decision, one that is favorable to President Donald Trump (I still never tire of typing those three glorious words). As reported by Axios: [emphasis added]

The Supreme Court on Monday granted an emergency stay blocking Congress from enforcing a subpoena for President Trump’s financial records, which a lower court had upheld in October.

Why it matters: The court didn’t explain its reasoning, but the decision makes it likely that it will take up the case. For now, Trump’s longtime accounting firm Mazars USA will not be forced to turn over Trump’s tax returns to House Democrats investigating the president.

  • The justices are giving Trump’s lawyers until Dec. 5 to formally file its appeal of the lower court ruling.
  • Trump is also seeking to have the Supreme Court block a subpoena from the Manhattan district attorney’s office, which is investigating hush-money payments that the Trump Organization made to Stormy Daniels in 2016.

Between the lines: A Supreme Court ruling on the case would likely not come until mid-January, AP notes. If House Democrats are planning to vote to impeach Trump by the end of the year, as they have signaled, the tax return investigation will likely not play a role.

As Attorney General William Barr laid out in his glorious speech last week, these subpoenas are nothing but a clear case of unbridled harassment of an executive by Democrats in congress and his former home state of New York. They have no legitimate basis in the constitution or the law, and if the courts legimize the corrupt intent behind them, they will have legitimized open congressional warfare to be conducted against every future president of either party into perpetuity.

This case is a big deal for the country’s future. Pay attention to it.

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

Meet Your Chief Justice: John Anthony Kennedy David Souter Roberts

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

Man, that global warming is wreaking havoc in California. Oh, wait… – Scientists have been recording daily temperatures in Los Angeles for 132 years.  In all that time, they have never recorded a month of February during which the mercury did not top 70 degrees Fahrenheit on at least one day.

But then 2019 came along, and the temperature in LA remained below the 70 degree level for the entire 28 days.  Can there be any doubt that the “scientists” at NOAA who have spent the last decade defrauding the historic global temperature records in order to make the modern era appear to be warming will soon issue a report claiming this February to be the “warmest on record”?

I give it maybe 30 days before that happens. The Climate Scam never ends.

Today’s Public Service Announcement: Just so no one forgets: Ralph KKK Baby-Killer Blackface Coonman Northam is still Governor of Virginia, one full month after his college photo was revealed for all to see. Thanks, Democrats!

 

Chief Justice John Anthony Kennedy David Souter Roberts strikes again. – In case you missed it, our squish Chief Justice made more moves this week to side with the liberal minority on the Supreme court:

“Roberts joined the liberals Wednesday in two rulings that left the conservatives in dissent. Most notably, he cast the deciding vote to order a new look at the mental competence of a death row inmate who says he can’t remember the crimes he committed.

The votes add to an unmistakable pattern, offering fresh indications that Roberts is in no hurry to oversee a conservative legal revolution. The chief justice has also joined 5-4 orders that blocked President Donald Trump from curbing bids for asylum at the Mexican border and stopped Louisiana from enforcing new abortion restrictions.”

Here’s my favorite part of that Bloomberg article:

“’Chief Justice Roberts’s voting pattern this year reflects a change,’ said Josh Blackman, a professor at the South Texas College of Law in Houston.”

You don’t sayyyyyy…

In reality, Roberts’ voting pattern simply reflects the pattern at-large for half of the Supreme Court justices appointed by Republican presidents going back to the great Ronald Reagan. Reagan gave us Sandra Day O’Connor and Anthony Kennedy, sandwiched around great justices in William Rehnquist and Antonin Scalia; Poppy Bush gave us the execrable closet leftist David Souter before redeeming himself with the stalwart Clarence Thomas; George W. Bush first served up Justice Roberts before trying to go even lower with the laughable nomination of Harriett Myers – who the Senate properly rejected – and then made a big comeback with the nomination of Samuel Alito.

So when you look at that history, the reality is that the three GOP presidents before Donald J. Trump batted .500 when it comes to putting strict constructionist judges onto the Supreme Court. Even Ronaldus Magnus had a hard time getting it all right, although in his defense he did first nominate Robert Bork before serving up Kennedy, after Bork was shamefully slandered by Senate Democrats.

Roberts gave us a preview of things to come nine years ago with his horrific “that fee is a tax except when I want to call it a fee for the purposes of this laughably twisted and illogical decision” Obamacare ruling. But he seems to have waited for Kennedy to be replaced by a real conservative justice before making his move to go all-in to become the squish vote on the Court.

After this week, there can be no doubt that that is exactly where his real comfort zone is, which only makes the 2020 election that much more critical for the future of our country.

President Trump needs at least one more appointment.

That is all.

Follow me on Twitter at @GDBlackmon

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
Scroll to top
%d bloggers like this: