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

The Evening Wrap: Rosenstein Tosses McCabe Under the Bus, and Other WINNING News

So many items of WINNING news today it’s hard to know where to start.

How about this: The ADP private sector jobs report for May is in, and although it’s a big negative number, it’s still positive news in the context of this whole self-imposed Wuhan Virus recession. The ADP number for May came in at a net jobs loss of 2.76 million, which is obviously a depressing number. But – and it’s a big BUT – the consensus of projections by the so-called experts in this field had predicted a loss of 8.663 million jobs, almost 6 million more than the actual number.

What this means is pretty clear:

– Many workers who had lost jobs over the last 10 weeks and filed initial claims for unemployment quickly found new jobs;

– Businesses are reopening faster than the “experts” have anticipated despite the efforts by an array of Democrat governors to prevent that from happening in states like Michigan, New York, California, Oregon, New Jersey and Nevada;

– The reduction in economic growth has obviously not been as deep and severe as most have estimated.

That’s why we have this next bit of WINNING news: The Dow Jones Industrial Average rocketed up above 26,000 today, just 5 trading days after it topped 25,000 last Wednesday, and just 9 weeks after it bottomed out at 18,591. That is a rise of ~40% in a little over 2 months.

At the same time, the NASDAQ hit 9,681 today, and is now within just 70 points of regaining every bit of the losses it suffered in March. Given that the stock markets tend to reflect where investors believe the economy will be 3 to 6 months from now, that represents a stunning vote of confidence in the U.S. economy.

Obviously, the investor class in our country has just as little faith in the economic “expert” class as you and I do.

Oh, hey, then there’s this: You may be wondering why all the rioting across the country suddenly got dialed back last night. President Trump is saying that it’s because some mayors – like Eric Garcetti in Los Angeles – called in the National Guard, and that likely has a lot of merit. But other depraved Democrats like Bill de Blasio and Lori Lightfoot in Chicago did not do that, yet saw a dramatic decrease in violence and mayhem in their cities, too.

Here’s why I believe that happened: The Democrats – and thus, Antifa and Black Lives Matter – got hold of bad polling data, which meant all the bad out-of-state actors were ordered to go home. Remember, every decision the Democrats make is based on polling data.

The bad data on the riots came to them in the form of a new poll from the very liberal Morning Consult polling group, which finds that Americans favor using the National Guard and the U.S. military to put down these riots by a frankly amazing 58%-30% margin. The move is even favored by Democrat voters by a 48-43 margin.

In another bit of bad polling data (for Democrats), the Rasmussen survey shows that a large plurality of Americans consider Antifa to be a terrorist organization. 49% of respondents answered yes, while just 30% said no.

If you don’t think that data caused a ton of Democrat heads to explode, then you don’t understand how Democrats think and operate.

Uhhhh, who to believe – Rod Rosenstein? Or Andrew McCabe? – It’s a very tough choice, but that is what America faces today following an interesting Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in which the oily, rodent-like former Acting Attorney General offered his sniffing and slurping testimony. In this instance, I would tend to believe Rosenstein, if only for the fact that being slightly more believable than the pathological liar McCabe is such a low damn bar.

As we pointed out yesterday, Rosenstein has much to answer for related to his gross misconduct in office during the active coup d’etat effort which he personally facilitated from May 2017 through March 2019. Sadly, the stilted format of these hearings and uselessness of so many of the GOP senators meant that he only had to answer for a few of those things today.

The main focus of the few Republicans who really went after Rosenstein today – Lindsey Graham, Ted Cruz and Chuck Grassley – was why Rosenstein signed off on the 4th fraudulent FISA warrant and appointed Robert Mueller shortly after he had assumed the office of Deputy Attorney General. Rosenstein’s wormy answer basically amounted to, “hey, I was just going on the information provided to me by Andy McCabe and his evil team, which included Peter Strzok and Lisa Page.”

Remember, at a press conference two years ago, Rosenstein went on and on about the fact that “In order to get a FISA warrant, you need an affidavit signed by a career law enforcement officer who swears the information is true… And if it is wrong, that person is going to face consequences.”

Remember that? I do, and today Rosenstein outright admitted his signing off on that FISA warrant based solely on the word of a pathological liar and his demonic staff was, well, wrong. But of course, he then added that, hey, he was just the new guy at DOJ and couldn’t be expected to try to verify any of the BS he was being fed by McCabe and Strzok and Page.

Naturally, McCabe was watching the proceedings at home – or maybe at CNN headquarters, where he remains employed as a richly-paid on-screen liar, er, “contributor” – and he issued a statement defending himself as the hearing was progressing, as reported by JustTheNews.com:

In a statement apparently authored shortly after Rosenstein made that assertion, McCabe said that Rosenstein’s “claims to have been misled by me or anyone from the F.B.I.” were “completely false.”

“I briefed Mr. Rosenstein on Jim Comey’s memos describing his interactions with the president days after Mr. Rosenstein wrote the memo firing Jim Comey,” McCabe said, in a statement read by committee Chairman Lindsey Graham.

Rosenstein’s remarks “loo[k] to be another sad attempt by the president and his men to rewrite the history of their actions in 2017,” McCabe said. “They have found in Mr. Rosenstein, then and now, a willing accessory in that effort.”

[End]

Hilariously, Lindsey Graham closed the hearing out by reading McCabe’s statement and allowing Rosenstein to give one more worm-like answer:

“I did not say that Mr. McCabe misled me,” he said. “Those were not my words. I think he is responding to somebody’s question.”

“What I said was, he did not reveal the Comey memos to me for a week. And that is true. He revealed them to me only a couple of hours before they showed up in the New York Times, and he did not reveal to me that he was having internal deliberations with his team about whether to target high-profile people for investigation.”

[End]

Here’s reality: Rosenstein admitted under oath today that he had zero basis for signing that FISA warrant; zero basis for believing anyone in the Trump Campaign or Transition team was colluding with the Russians; and thus, zero basis for appointing a special counsel. He admitted that he basically didn’t know nuthin’ about nuthin’ and just allowed himself to be strung along by the coup cabal made up of Obama holdovers at the DOJ and FBI.

Absolutely sickening.

Tomorrow, expect the GOP majority to vote unanimously to issue subpoenas to more than 50 Obama loyalists who tried to fix the 2016 election and then overthrow a duly-elected POTUS.

This is actually gonna be fun to watch.

I leave you with this absolutely epic clip of Senator Ted Cruz destroying Rosenstein, Barack Obama, Susan Rice and Joe Biden at today’s hearing:

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

Rod Rosenstein Has Much to Answer For, if Only the Senators Will Demand he do so

The Afternoon Campaign Update

Rod Rosenstein will testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee tomorrow in Lindsey Graham’s first Obamagate-related hearing since he assumed the chairmanship in January 2019. Supposedly, the committee will then reconvene on Thursday to vote to subpoena a long list of the major players in the whole Russia Collusion hoax that morphed into a soft coup d’etat under the guise of the Mueller Investigation.

Who was the guy responsible for creating the Gestapo/KGB-style Mueller Investigation? Why, Mr. Rosenstein, of course, which, combined with the fact that he also personally signed one of the fraudulently-compiled applications for FISA warrants presumably explains why Graham chose him as the witness to kick off the committee’s festivities. But those are far from the only items of interest we know about Rosenstein’s role in the four-year Obamagate hoax.

Here are some others:

  • We know Rosenstein had a long series of contacts with Robert Mueller in the two weeks leading up to Mueller’s appointment as Special Counsel – what were those about?
  • We know that Rosenstein actually recommended that President Trump appoint Mueller to be his FBI Director after he had fired James Comey.
  • We know Rosenstein actually set up an interview for Mueller for that position with the President himself, and on the very next day appointed Mueller to be the Special Counsel. He should be forced by GOP committee members to explain that timing of events, and why he thought that Mueller of all people would be the right person to lead the Trump FBI.
  • We have very solid indications that Rosenstein, in a meeting with Andrew McCabe and other FBI/DOJ coup cabal participants, offered to wear a wire to record his conversations with the President of the United States.
  • We know that Rosenstein wrote two additional authorization memos extending Mueller’s scope in the months following his appointment, but have not seen the full text of those memos.
  • We know that, because Jeff Sessions was recused, Rosenstein personally had oversight over the entire Mueller enterprise and the rampant abuses and Gestapo-style tactics it used to deprive U.S. citizens of their rights and freedoms. In a span of two solid years, Rosenstein never exercised his authority to rein in the out-of-control special counsel operation.
  • We know that Rosenstein coordinated with then-Washington office U.S. Attorney Jessie Liu to cover up the crimes committed by James Wolfe, the counsel for the Senate Intel Committee who traded national secrets for sex with a New York Times reporter less than half his age.
  • We know that Rosenstein coordinated multiple times with the corrupt U.S. attorneys framing General Mike Flynn to withhold exculpatory documents from Flynn’s defense team.
  • We know that Rosenstein stood before the assembled national press and announced Mueller’s sham indictments of Concorde Management, a Russian firm, knowing full well those indictments had zero substance behind them and were purely for show.

This is all stuff I can think of just off the top of my head – there is no doubt much, much more fertile ground to be plowed in tomorrow’s hearing with Rosenstein if Graham and his fellow GOP committee members are willing to do so.

Certainly, if this hearing were being held before the completely corrupted, RINO-filled Senate Intel Committee, we could only rely on Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton to ask anything resembling tough questions of Rosenstein. But here’s the thing about the Judiciary Committee: There are half a dozen Republican members who can be counted on to really take it to this witness.

Those senators include:

  • Texas Senator Ted Cruz;
  • Missouri Senator Josh Hawley;
  • Crusty old Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley;
  • Tennessee Senator Marsha Blackburn;
  • Louisiana Senator John Kennedy; and
  • Senator Graham himself, who, despite his interminable delaying tactics, can be counted on to put on a good show in front of the TV cameras.

The rest of the Republicans – Senators Mike Lee (UT), John Cornyn (TX), Joni Ernst (IA), Mike Crapo (ID), Ben Sasse (NE), and Thom Tillis (NC) will likely be useless. And of course, the Democrat members can be counted on to obfuscate and resort to their usual subject-shifting histrionics. Because they aren’t serious people, and that’s what they do.

Rosenstein is a clever and skilled lawyer, so no one should expect any slip-ups or big new revelations to escape his thin lips. But he will be testifying under oath, and the six senators listed above will make sure that this hearing will not be easy for him.

He has much to answer for.

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

Larry Schweikart: All the Times the Corrupt Media Pronounced Trump Dead

Guest Piece by America’s History Teacher, Larry Schweikart

[Note: Larry Schweikart, historian and author of the wonderful book “Reagan: The American President,” put up an excellent thread on Twitter last night, in which he takes the reader down memory lane. The thread chronicles many of the hundreds of times Democrats and their toadies in the corrupt, fake news media pronounced “the beginning of the end for Donald Trump.”

Think of how many times you have heard some talking head on cable TV make that statement. Trump has been pronounced dead so many times by so many nitwits that he is the envy of every alley filled with 9-lived cats. Below is Mr. Schweikart’s (@larryschweikart on Twitter) rapid-fire listing of many of the most epic examples, as only he can do it.]

1) As promised, a very long thread that I will Threadreader asap. But it’s important to review the constant, unending, perpetual claims that “it’s over for Drumpf” and “we’ve got him now.”

2) This is in light of the China Virus-It is real but it is also one of those “Good crises that go to waste” for DemoKKKrats & Hoax News media. So I am not misunderstood, Hoax Newsers/DemoKKKrats did not create/ invent the China Virus, but they are doing their best to exploit it.

3) So, let’s do a little trip down memory lane. Some of this comes from my “How Trump Won” with @joelpollak.

4) The first “gotcha” moment came in Iowa in July 2018 when Trump, asked a question about John McTurd–who had criticized him–replied that McTurd was a “war hero because he was captured . . . I like people that weren’t captured.” Supposedly this constituted Trump disparaging . .

4) contd . . all POWs & even the military. Immediately pundits & GOP elites said it was over for Trump. (“Trump crosses one line too many” blared Hot Air) Many reveled in thinking Trump had ended his campaign. Marco Rubio (Rubes) said the comment should be “a disqualifier . . .

4) contd . . as a commander in chief.”

Not so fast: Trump refused to apologize (which won him respect from people sick of Republicans apologizing for anything & everything) then pivoted to McTurd’s pathetic record on veterans.

5) The rapid spread of the story about 32-year-old Kate Steinle’s murder by an illegal in California brushed the McTurd story off the news. Blind Lemon Don grilled Trump on his comments about illegals “raping” but Trump had the last laugh:

5) contd . . “somebody’s doing the raping . . . . Who’s doing the raping?” Trump asked. Blind Lemon had no answer. By July 20 Trump took the lead in the GOP primary polling.

6) Except for a span of a few days in October, when Ben Carson slightly polled ahead of Trump, he never lost the poll lead throughout the nomination process.

7) Enter the “experts.” Karl Rove said Trump “won’t win” the nomination; George Will said Trump would be a disaster in the debates; Vox ran a piece saying Trump was “surging,” then reassured its readers “Here’s why He Won’t Win.”

7) contd . . Ross Douthat of the NYSlimes said “Donald Trump will not be the Republican nominee.” WaCompost editor James Downie: “Let’s dispose of the notion that Trump has a real shot at winning in Nov.” HuffPo: “Trump will not win the general election.” More?

7) Karl Rove: “Trump can’t win the general election.” Sean Trende: “There’s probably a 90% chance Trump loses.” The (Commie) Nation: “Relax, Donald Trump can’t win.” And our buddy Fat Frank Luntz: “Hillary Clinton will be the next President” (on election night!)

8) By August 2015, in public while all the GOP elites were saying Trump couldn’t win, @RushLimbaugh discussed story about big donors who were telling all the other candidates to do what it took to “Take Trump Out.”

9) In that debate Trump was the only candidate who refused to say he would back the party nominee if he didn’t win. To the GOPe that was horrifying. To mainstream Republicans looking at a repeat of a McTurd or Minion candidacy with Yeb (“low energy”) Bush, this was a good sign.

10) Trump had singlehandedly pushed illegal immigration onto the front burner: one project tracing the number of media “mentions” found that stories about illegals doubled after Trump.

11) By that time, among national voices only Rush and @scottadamssays caught onto Trump’s dominance of the news cycle, which cost him nothing. Meanwhile, competitors burned through their money.

12) So-called conservative voices ramped up their attacks. Rich Lowry called Trump “a loudmouth mogul,” Fox News routinely criticized Trump—but none of his opponents—and GOP Party Chairman Reince Priebus (“Rinse and Repeat”) said “Donald Trump [is not] the Republican brand.”

12) contd . . .That was music to the ears of many who were sick of the “Republican brand.” Ari Fleischer said Trump was a “risk for the party” by tarnishing every Republican.

13) No sooner did Trump critics claim he had no”meat” in his proposals (a fact that ended Ross Perot’s boomlet in 1992), Trump produced a widespread immigration reform plan with specific policy proposals.

14) By then some were admitting Trump might win the Iowa caucuses. Even then, they ignored the social media dominance that Trump wielded: he had almost 4mm Twitter followers, compared to Clinton’s 4+ million followers. (Later, one third of Clinton’s were found to be bots).

14) contd . . Trump’s weekly Twitter growth exceeded that of four of his main competitors combined. Trump gained about 400,000 followers a week in late 2015.

15) By then also, Trump was holding massive rallies of 15,000-20,000 people. No Republican & only Dinobernie Sanders could ever approach those numbers. At the end of October, Trump yielded the polling lead to Carson—who quickly crashed.

16) Next Trump raised the question about Muslim loyalty to the US. When the Hoax News/GOPe jumped on him, Trump claimed there were “thousands” of Muslims shown on TV celebrating 9/11. (Fact Check: True). Hoax News media had deliberately downplayed those celebrations . . .

16) contd . . in an effort to portray the majority of Muslims as “just like us.” Then tapes surfaced proving Trump’s claims.

17) Increasingly, by November 2015, it looked as though only the nearly-equally hated Ted Cruz could stop Trump. Cruz had made enemies out of the establishment with his one man government shutdown for a time under the Obama (Zero) Administration.

18) Then some amazing polls started to come out: Trump was viewed by black & Hispanic Republicans more favorably than any other candidate including Yeb & Rubes who pandered to them.

18) contd . . . Stories examining Trump’s support found it was across the board; young, old, men, women, college-educated and non-college educated.

19) Only two years later did analysis show that college education had little to do with opposition to Trump, but the location of the college educated Republican (i.e., big city vs non-big city). Naturally, this analysis did NOT come from GOPe insiders like Jay Cost or Adrian Gray

20. Having resigned themselves to the fact that Trump would indeed win a lot of primaries, Hoax News and the GOPe insiders now fell back to their next position, that Trump couldn’t reach the 1,237 delegate number for the nomination.

20) contd . . (My own analysis in late Feb. 2016 showed Trump would win close to 1,300 delegates. He actually got closer to 1,400).

21) Then came the next “This is it for Drumpf”. After an article from the National Enquirer about Ted Cruz cheating appeared, Cruz blamed Trump. A PAC associated with Cruz in Utah ran an ad on Melania Trump citing her days as a lingerie model.

21) contd . . The incident was enough to get Cruz Wisconsin & raised hopes he and Ohio’s John Kasich could somehow unite to deny Trump the delegates.

22) Perhaps more important, Cruz had begun poaching Trump’s committed delegates trying to persuade them to switch. This led Trump to counter by firing Corey Lewandowski and bringing in Paul Manafort.

23) Manafort had one job and one job only: secure the nomination from the “insiders.” He did it well. Make no mistake: without Manafort, Trump wouldn’t be president.

24) All hopes of defeating Trump within the primary process ended after a Cruz loss in Indiana.”We left it all on the field,” a dejected Cruz said.

25) Next up in the “This is it for Drumpf” was the notion that Trump would spit the GOP. Didn’t happen. A few pungerpuckers like Bill (Broken) Kristol and David FrenchFry threw tantrums, but most Republicans lined up to defeat Cankles.

26) What ensued was the most criminal, unethical, and fraudulent use of “news” and “polling” in American history. I’ve been over their tactics before. What Hoax News & Hoax Polling did not realize was that by lying perpetually and universally about Trump . . .

26) contd . . they ended all claims to legitimacy they ever had. Republicans never believed them. After November, neither would DemoKKKrats.

A whole book needs to be written on this whoring of polling & the Hoax News media and its effect on real news.

27) One of the next major steps for Trump was to ditch Manafort. First, charges were coming out that he was dirty and tied to Ukraine. Second, however—even unknown to Trump—he needed a different type of campaign for the stretch. Enter Kellyanne Conway and Steve Bannon.

27) contd . . Just as Trump needed Manafort at the right moment, he needed Bannon and Conway at the right moment. But the foundation for the campaign was Brad Parscale and Jared Kushner—Mr. #s and Mr. $$.

28) By mid-October, Trump was hitting on all cylinders, while Cankles was often hitting the pavement. To this day, no one knows what was wrong with her, but her failing health and uninspiring persona had her falling behind Trump (again, despite Hoax Polling).

29) An internal poll shared with me by Bannon in the first week of October had Trump winning & had him VERY close in Rhode Island (!), Oregon, and Illinois. I was so stunned I asked Bannon if those numbers were right. He confidently said yes.

30) Then, Oct. 9, just before the debate, came the “Access Hollywood” video–the latest “This will finish Drumpf” move. While it likely cost him New Hampshire and Minnesota–and possibly the popular vote–it flushed through the system before it could do permanent damage.

31) Next up was the election, then the immediate post-election stories that Trump would resign before the inauguration. I still don’t know where those stories came from, except Pence was always elevated in these stories.

32) As inauguration neared, next up was the “Trump will resign soon. He really never intended to govern.”

33) Then came the shocker: Sessions recused himself & Rat Rosenstein signed off on the Special Counsel to look at the “muh Russia” collusion campaign hatched by Cankles.

34) That led to the “It’s Mulehead Time” & claims Mulehead’s band of flagellating phonies would “take down Drumpf.”

35) Next in the “Get Drumpf” lineup: Porny Daniels, who turned out to have nothing. She was aided and abetted by “the next president,” Michael Avenatti.

35) contd . . He soon found himself facing a felony conviction for extortion from Nike. Avenatti was held in jail awaiting sentencing—the man who (it was thought) “would put Drumpf in jail.”

36) On October 27, 2017, Manafort was indicted. “Now we’re gonna get Drumpf.” Except not. Manafort never gave Mulehead or his team any info, despite massive jail sentences.

37) That same month, Omarosa resigned touting in her book Unhinged (which must have referred to herself) that she had “secret tapes” of Trump using racial language. Except she didn’t. Though she may have violated the Espionage Act in releasing a tape, she is still not in jail.

38) In May 2018, the “Now we got Drumpf” loonies indicted Michael Cohen & raided his offices. Whackadoodle Libs (WLs) were SURE that he & all the files/computers the FBI seized would be the silver bullet.

38) contd . . Now, with Avenatti, Cohen became the second one who was gonna “be the one to get Drumpf” who himself ended up in jail. Cohen was sentenced to three years in prison for tax evasion & campaign finance violations.

39) In March 2019, the Whackadoodle Lefties’ wet dream, the Mulehead Report, was released—except there was nothing in it. Despite what you may read on the Satanic Wikipedia, the report proved no Russkie Collusion. It so disappointed the WLs they dragged . . .

39) contd . . the senile Mulehead into Congressional Testimony, where he stammered, stalled, and failed to provide one single damning piece of evidence. WLs were beside themselves. Their “sure thing” to get Drumpf had blown up in their faces.

40) In July 2019, using a leaked “whistleblower” (i.e., traitor) report of irregularities in a phone call between Ukraine (note: not “muh Russia” any more but Russia’s ENEMY!), Congress began an investigation centered on Lt. Col. Veeta Vita Vindman.

40) contd . . Since Mulehead had collapsed, this was the only thing the now-DemoKKKrat-controlled House could concoct. They came up with two articles of impeachment.

41) In December 2019, the utterly corrupt Congress approved the articles on “abuse of power” and “obstruction of Congress” (a term that doesn’t even exist in the Constitution.) The Senate rightly voted these two down 52-48 and 53-47. Only one so-called Republican, . . .

41) contd . . Minion Romney, voted for either. Soon thereafter, the traitorous Veeta Vita Vindman and ambassador Gordon Sondland were given the boot.

42) And finally, there was the “Trump will never run for reelection.” Oddly, Trump filed for a reelect committee in 2017, almost immediately after winning the first time. This time, he has raised more money, & faces a far weaker opponent, while having made more inroads . . .

42) contd . . with black and Hispanic voters since 2016.

And WLs think the China Virus or blue-state lockdowns are gonna get Drumpf now?

43) Trump will be reelected with between 320 and 340 electoral votes in 2020, likely winning the pop vote by a significant margin.

But Demented Biteme could turn those numbers into an even bigger margin for Trump.

Don’t bet against him.

 

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

Congress Declares Itself a Non-essential Entity

The Mid-Day Campaign Update (Because the Campaign Does Not Break For Lunch)

Tell us something we didn’t already know. – Every American should take note of the fact that the United States Congress chose to leave Washington D.C. for well over a full month in the midst of the most severe national and global crisis since September 11, 2001.

This represents absolute dereliction of duty on a grand and unprecedented scale.

Congress has basically classified itself as a non-essential entity. But hey, we’ve kind of known that all along, haven’t we?

Wait. We needed MIT to conduct a study to figure this out? – The New York Post carried a story this morning headlined “MIT study: Subways a ‘major disseminator’ of coronavirus in NYC”.

Excerpt from the report:

The paper, by MIT economics professor and physician Jeffrey Harris, points to a parallel between high ridership “and the rapid, exponential surge in infections” in the first two weeks of March — when the subways were still packed with up to 5 million riders per day — as well as between turnstile entries and virus hotspots.

“New York City’s multitentacled subway system was a major disseminator — if not the principal transmission vehicle — of coronavirus infection during the initial takeoff of the massive epidemic,” argues Harris, who works as a physician in Massachusetts.

You don’t say. Wonder what tipped them off?

Speaking of utter absurdities… – The corrupt news-fakers at Reuters carried a story this morning with this real, actual headline: “China says WHO has said no evidence coronavirus was made in a lab”.

Ok, so, Reuters quotes China, which quotes the corrupt WHO, which Reuters knows is just reciting China’s talking points. The article itself consists of 2 paragraphs containing maybe 75 words, with zero constructive analysis.

No hydroxychloroquine for her! – Just when Fredo gets towards the end of his own alleged recovery period from the Wuhan Virus, his wife allegedly comes down with it:

After demonizing hydroxychloroquine on-air for weeks solely because President Donald Trump has endorsed its use, Fredo mysteriously refuses to discuss what medications he has been treated with to fight the illness. Perhaps his wife will eventually be more forthcoming.

And now a message from your favorite budding James Bond villain:

Texas’s stellar Senator Ted Cruz saw this plaintive tweet from Gates, and responded as only Ted Cruz can do:

Brutal.

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

FISA Renewal: The Key Reform is to Put People in Jail

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

One of the most depressing aspects of Attorney General William Barr’s ongoing conduct of his job is his current campaign to have the FISA law renewed without a single modification. Coming as it does directly in the wake of the report by DOJ IG Michael Horowitz identifying no fewer than 17 instances in which highi-ranking  DOJ/FBI officials lied to the FISA court in order to obtain warrants to spy on the Trump Campaign/Transition Team/Administration during 2016 and 2017, this insistence on a “clean” renewal of this dangerous law is simply inexcusable.

Barr is assuring Senators that they don’t need to fix the law because he personally will see to it that real reforms of the process are implemented within the DOJ and FBI. But if the administrative reforms offered by Christopher Wray – which consist essentially of a couple of yearly on-line “training” sessions – are any indication, that’s just another deflection by people who have no intention of actually fixing anything or punishing anyone.

Appearing on Fox Business last night, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made some very astute remarks about the current debate that people need to listen to. Below is a clip of his interview with host Greg Jarrett, followed by some outtakes from his comments.

First, the clip:

 

Outtakes:

Fitton: Certainly, the process as it is set up isn’t protecting anyone’s rights. The FISA Court didn’t do its job; certainly they were the victims of a criminal conspiracy, But even when exposed, they haven’t held those responsible accountable. Forget about the Durham investigation: The FISA courts have inherent authority to investigate any criminality before the court, and I’m not seeing any evidence it is interested in doing that. If I were DOJ and FBI, I would have offered to help the court do that, but of course, DOJ and FBI are just pretending to quote, reform the system here.

The President has inherent constitutional authority to spy on foreign nationals. He doesn’t need FISA courts to do so. That authority is there, whether or not there is a FISA court. The FISA court is kind of like the War Powers Act – it’s kind of an uneasy compromise among the branches to try to restrain a presidential power that [congress] does not have the constitutional authority to restrain.

The key reform is to put people in jail who abuse the process criminally. This reform game is just that: A game. You know, Barr may have a credible point of view when he says, just renew it. Because the reform isn’t going to fix it in the sense that there’s no penalty for criminally violating the rights of American citizens.

The President’s a crime victim, and no one’s done a darn thing about it thus far. My thinking is that DOJ doesn’t even want to do anything [regarding reforms] during this period when FISA reforms are being debated, because they want the FISA court to continue operating.

Judicial Watch found – we had to force it out of the Justice Department – they admitted the FISA courts held not one hearing on any of the four FISA applications…on warrants targeting a candidate for president and a President of the United States. Why the heck have a FISA court if that’s the rubber stamp approach it takes?

The other key point here is that we still don’t have all the information. We still don’t know what else is in those FISA warrants. We don’t have all the text messages; we don’t have all the emails. So, they’re telling us they’ve got a handle on the problem; well, we don’t know the full extent of the problem and the full extent of the potential criminality.

The President is right to be skeptical of being rushed into approving this without any of the full information needed for any serious person to make a decision here.

Jarrett: In 2002, Comey was beaten up by the FISA court for his agents lying to the Court. He promised to institute reforms called the Woods procedures. And what happened? His agents went about circumventing those procedures, and of course we saw it in the Carter Page case. I’ve seen this film before; I know how it ends.

[End]

Fitton is right, of course: The one “reform” that would create a sure and long-lasting chilling effect on further abuses of the FISA process by FBI and DOJ officials would be to see Barr and Durham issue indictments targeting those who we know criminally abused the process in 2016/17: James Comey, Rod Rosenstein, Sally Yates, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, and on and on it goes.

Sadly, there is little indication that Barr has the slightest intention of pursuing real justice for any of those wrongdoers. Trusting Barr – who has repeatedly praised the worthless apparatchik Wray – to do anything real in terms of implementing “reforms” internally that would prevent future abuses is a fool’s errand.

I am generally opposed to Republicans in the Senate joining Democrats in filibusters, but this effort to renew the FISA law is a needed exception to the rule. Republican libertarians like Rand Paul, Mike Lee and Ted Cruz should be working to form a bipartisan coalition opposing ANY renewal of this dangerous statute until visible efforts to bring the known abusers of the system to justice are publicly taking place. Then, and only then, should the DOJ be trusted again with the use of this law.

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

WATCH: Ted Cruz Sums up the House Impeachment Scam

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

If you don’t think there was very good reason to investigate Joe and Hunter Biden’s influence game vis a vis Ukraine, then you, friend, are a liberal hack. – That’s the one and only conclusion any reasonable person can reach after Pam Bondi’s tour de force on the Senate floor Monday, where she literally evicerated the father/son gang of thugs.

Bondi, a former Attorney General of Florida who is a key part of the Trump defense team, not only exposed the Bidens’ racketeering in Ukraine, but also in China and Iraq, two other countries where Quid Pro Joe served as Obama’s “point man” on foreign policy. During the course of her expose’, Bondi not only exposed the Bidens, she also exposed the House Managers as dishonest hacks, and exposed the news media for the manner in which it actually made token efforts to expose the Biden corruption, but then turned on a dime to defend Quid Pro Joe once he declared himself a candidate for the presidency.

This exposure naturally threw the Capital press corps into a rage, and Texas Senator Ted Cruz became a target of their ire when he held a brief presser after Bondi had finished. Watch as Cruz exposes the Democrat/media hacks for what they are in this clip, which is followed by a transcript.

Here’s the Clip:

 

Here’s the transcript for those of you who still like to read stuff:

Cruz: This was the first time in the entire proceeding we have heard just the beginning of the serious evidence of corruption involving Burisma, the Ukrainian natural gas company that paid Hunter Biden, Joe Biden’s son, a million dollars a year…[reporter interrupts]… let me finish, I’ll answer the question…[another interruption] … let me answer the question without interrupting me please.

Burisma paid Hunter Biden, Joe Biden’s son, a million dollars a year while Hunter [Joe]  Biden threatened Ukraine to withhold a billion dollars in aid unless and until they filed the prosecutor investigating his son.

Reporter: When did Hunter Biden threaten anyone, sir?

Cruz: Joe Biden. Joe Biden, the Vice President of the United States, and we just saw a video, and I would encourage each and every news outlet here to actually show the video of Joe Biden bragging how he told the President of the Ukraine he was gonna cut off a billion dollars…he was gonna block a billion dollars in foreign aid to Ukraine unless they fired the prosecutor.

And Joe Biden, in his own words, ‘son of a bitch, the fired the guy.’

Reporter: So, why not have Bolton testify? [lots of belligerent crosstalk here from reporters]

Cruz: So, I get that the press loves to obsess over the latest bombshell. Listen, I don’t know what John Bolton’s book says or doesn’t say. I’ve seen the New York Times coverage, but at the end of the day, it doesn’t impact the legal issue before this senate.

The legal issue before this senate is whether the President has the authority to investigate corruption. The House Managers built their entire case [reporter tries to interrupt] on the proposition that investigating Burisma corruption, investigating the Bidens for corruption, was baseless and a sham. [more reporter interruptions]

Hold on, let me finish this…[more interruptions – note how desperate the media hacks are to prevent him from getting this point made] no, I’m gonna finish my point and then I’ll be happy to answer your question. The House Managers based their entire case on the proposition that investigating Burisma – and concerning the Bidens – was baseless and a sham.

That proposition is absurd. We’ve just seen…they said there wasn’t a shred of evidence concerning corruption. We’ve just seen two hours of evidence. And at a minimum, it was not only reasonable and justified, but the President, I think, had an obligation to investigate corrupt that potentially extended to the very highest levels of government.

Reporter: Senator, in that two hours, none of the President’s attorneys mentioned a single possible crime that Hunter or Joe Biden are accused of. [Cruz laughs out loud at this] What this basically is, is Hunter Biden got a job, and his father was Vice President. If that’s a crime, shouldn’t half of your children be in jail?

Cruz: [Laughing in the idiot’s face] My children are 9 and 11, and I’m sorry that you want to throw a 9 year-old in prison, but at this point, my third-grader plays basketball and softball at her school, so stop playing the nasty [reporter interrupts] no, stop playing the nasty Washington game [reporter interrupts again] attacking a 9 year-old? [lost of crosstalk here]

Reporter: Senator, we have seen reports of a possible one for one trade on witnesses. Would you be open to that idea?

Cruz: In my view, additional witnesses are not necessary. The House Managers have presented their case, and they haven’t come remotely close to meeting their burden of proof. Now, that being said, if the senate later this week when we vote on witnesses decides to go down the road to additional witnesses, I think at a minimum, the most important witness for the senate to hear from is now Hunter Biden. [reporter interrupts] Let another reporter have a chance [talking to the previous idiot]

Reporter: Why don’t you want to hear from John Bolton under oath?

Cruz: I don’t believe the testimony is necessary. The House Managers have a burden of proof. A burden of proof to prove their case. They have fallen woefully short. The standard under the constitution is high crimes and misdemeanors. They have not demonstrated any law was violated, and the President was entirely justified in asking for an investigation concerning corruption in the Ukraine and potentially Hunter Biden and Joe Biden.

At the end of the day, there might have been [lots of crosstalk here before the next idiot reporter asks the idiot reporter question of all time]

Reporter: What about the shadow over the presidency? If you don’t have witness testimony in this trial…

Cruz: [laughing out loud at the idiot hack again] Look, the “shadow over the presidency” is the last several months of sham proceedings in the House, where they only heard from prosecution witnesses, and they ignored the very substantial evidence of corruption with the Vice President, going potentially to the very top of the [Obama] Administration.

And let me – by the way, the Obama Administration pointed out the conflict of interest over and over and over again, and so did the press, until the press decided to defend the House Democrats’ partisan impeachment attack. This has been a sham from the beginning. Presidents have the authority to investigate corruption, and it was overwhelming.

[End]

Thank you, Senator Cruz, for summing it all up so succinctly and clearly. No wonder the media hates you so damn much.

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

Did Nikki Haley Just Reveal the Leaders of the 25th Amendment Push?

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

Tired of all this #WINNING yet? Yeah, neither am I. – For what seems like the 16,000th time during President Donald Trump’s term in office, the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed at yet another record high on Monday, as the Trump economy just keeps roaring along. Democrats and fake journalists everywhere were doubling up on their depression meds as the markets closed.

When Nikki Haley speaks, people listen. – When people start surveying the GOP landscape post-Trump, whether that comes in January after being removed from the the presidency by the Senate (which is not likely to happen), in January 2021 after a loss in the 2020 election (also not in the cards) or in January 2025 following the completion of his second term in office (bingo!), the survey inevitably lands to the name of Nikki Haley as one of his most likely successors.

Other names also arise, of course: Names like Mike Pence and Mike Pompeo and Ted Cruz, and the less obvious names like Florida Governor Ron DeSantis and Ohio Congressman Jim Jordan and even Texas Congressman Dan Crenshaw. Lindsey Graham, with his thrice-weekly appearances on one Fox News evening program or another, is obviously angling for another run at the gig, as are Rand Paul and even Kanye West. But inevitably, the name of Nikki Haley always comes up.

She is, after all, a former successful governor of South Carolina, and a person who, after not really being on board with the Trump Train during the 2016 campaign, created a very high profile for herself as Trump’s very loyal, very aggressive and very outspoken UN Ambassador. Although her record as Governor was decidedly mixed from a conservative perspective, perhaps more than any of Trump’s cabinet-level officials, Haley has stood out as the most aggressive advocate for his international policies.

Thus it is that anything she has to say about the goings-on inside White House during her two-year tenure is given a lot of weight by most Trump supporters. In a Sunday interview with Kelly O’Donnell of CBS, Haley basically accused both then-Chief of Staff John Kelly and then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson of rank insubordination, even though she said they claimed that was not their intent.

Here’s the key outtake:

Haley recounts a closed-door encounter with then-White House Chief of Staff John Kelly and then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson: “Kelly and Tillerson confided in me that when they resisted the president, they weren’t being insubordinate, they were trying to save the country … Tillerson went on to tell me the reason he resisted the president’s decisions was because, if he didn’t, people would die. This was how high the stakes were, he and Kelly told me. We are doing the best we can do to save the country, they said. We need you to work with us and help us do it. This went on for over an hour.”

O’Donnell asked, “You memorialized that conversation? It definitely happened?”

“It absolutely happened,” said Haley. “And instead of saying that to me, they should’ve been saying that to the president, not asking me to join them on their sidebar plan. It should’ve been, ‘Go tell the president what your differences are, and quit if you don’t like what he’s doing.’ But to undermine a president is really a very dangerous thing. And it goes against the Constitution, and it goes against what the American people want. And it was offensive.”

[We asked them to respond. John Kelly tells “Sunday Morning”: “If by resistance and stalling she means putting a staff process in place … to ensure the (president) knew all the pros and cons of what policy decision he might be contemplating so he could make an informed decision, then guilty as charged.”]

Undermining a president from the inside is indeed a very dangerous thing, as Haley notes, and her accusation against Kelly and Tillerson rings true given everything else we know about the two men and their behavior while serving in those positions. Tillerson repeatedly made his personal disdain for the President and his lack of support for Trump policies related to North Korea, China and other parts of the world very clear while serving as SOS, which is the main reason why his tenure in the office was so short. Kelly’s first move after moving into his Chief of Staff role was not to go after the myriad leakers inside the White House, but rather to cut the President off from his most loyal supporters and start to systematically force them out of their jobs.

Rumors have run rampant for more than two years now that both men were willing participants in the mid-2017 plot to dummy up a rationale for removing Trump from office under the 25th Amendment, a plot we know beyond any reasonable doubt that Rod Rosenstein was a part of. If you believe in the whole “where there’s smoke there’s fire” paradigm, it seems extremely likely that those persistent rumors must have some basis in reality.

If Haley’s contention about the approach by Tillerson and Kelly is accurate – and there is little reason to believe that it is not – then it would be consistent with a move that would be made as a part of a larger 25th amendment effort targeting the President. Haley’s contention here, and cryptic use of the term “sidebar plan,” is troubling in the extreme, and Tillerson’s refusal to even respond to it does not reflect well on him. Kelly’s response, which does not in any way address the accusation, may be even worse.

As mentioned earlier, Haley’s interview – promoting her new book – is also a not-so-subtle attempt to keep herself in the public eye, ready to quickly move in the unlikely event of Trump’s actual removal by the Senate. The following passage reveals that part of her personal agenda:

Haley insists she has no immediate plans to run for any office, including the presidency, and as she departed the Trump administration last year she said, “I can promise you what I’ll be doing is campaigning for this one.”

She told O’Donnell, “A year is a long time in politics. It really is a lifetime in politics. And so, I think what’s best for me is take it a year at a time and see what happens.”

With her new book, lucrative speaking engagements, and a seat on the corporate board of Boeing, Nikki Haley acknowledges there are still chapters to be written:  “I’m too young to stop fighting. I’ll always be out there. I’ll always use the power of my voice for what I believe is good.”

So, whether the jumping off point becomes early 2020, early 2021 or the 2024 election campaign, you can be sure that Nikki Haley will be vying to become the face of the GOP in the wake of the Trump presidency. Lining herself up as this President’s most loyal and vocal supporter helps her cause immensely.

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 4 5 6
Scroll to top
%d bloggers like this: