Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘2020 Election’

Conservative Mom Who Famously Confronted Beto O’Rourke Scores Massive Election Win


Reported By Jack Davis | Published July 1, 2020 at 8:18am

Lauren Boebert, whose forthright defense of the Second Amendment at a rally for former Democratic presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke brought her national attention, on Tuesday won a Republican congressional primary in Colorado.

President Donald Trump retweeted a post from Boebert in which she said, “I am a mother to 4 boys. My husband and I are raising them to be strong men! I refuse to send my children into a socialist nation. Their freedom IS my motivator! Threaten the liberty of Americans, and I’ll be there to hold you accountable!”

“Congratulations on a really great win!” Trump said.

The president had earlier tweeted support for incumbent Republican Rep. Scott Tipton, who drew 45 percent of the vote compared with 55 percent for the challenger.

Boebert — who operates Shooters Grill, a restaurant in Rifle, Colorado, where all of the waitresses openly carry handguns — will face Democrat Diane Mitsch Bush in the November election.

“I’m excited and eager to take this fight on to the Democrats and represent the people of the 3rd Congressional District, just like I’ve been promising them I would,” Boebert said after the polls closed, according to The Denver Post.

Her website is an unapologetic, in-your-face declaration of opposition to all that leftist Democrats stand for.

“There is a battle for the heart and soul of our country that I intend on helping win,” Boebert says on the website. “I’m running for Congress to stand up for our conservative values, address our current representatives’ failed promises, and put far-left Democrats back in their place.”

Advertisement – story continues below

“Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the Squad and the rest of these left-wing lunatics are taking a wrecking ball to our country while our current representative stays utterly silent,” she says. “Hard-working, patriotic Americans like you and me don’t want the Green New Deal and socialized medicine. Every time AOC and the rest of the Squad pipes up with another crazy idea, I will remind them that our belief in God, Country and Family are what built the United States of America into the greatest nation the world has ever known.”

Boebert also has taken a strong pro-police stand at a time when law enforcement is under attack across the country.

RELATED: NASCAR Driver Unveils ‘Trump 2020’ Paint Scheme He’ll Use Starting This Week

She crashed an O’Rourke rally last fall to take the former Texas congressman to task for saying he would take away Americans’ AR-15s if elected.

Boebert was wearing her Glock handgun as she confronted the Democratic candidate.

“I was one of the gun-owning Americans that heard your speech and heard what you had to say, regarding, ‘Hell yes, we’re going to take your AR-15s and your AK-47s.’ Well, I am here to say, hell no, you’re not,” she said as O’Rourke urged the crowd scolding her to allow her to speak.

Boebert said the only way citizens have to protect themselves against the evil of the world is to be ready to defend themselves.

“I would like to know how you intend to legislate evil. Because it is not the gun, it is the heart of the man that does that,” she said.

Boebert said gun confiscation would strip protection from“American citizens like myself, American mothers — I have four children, I am 5-feet-0, 100 pounds, cannot really defend myself with a fist.”

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Ann Coulter: ‘Woke Corporate America’ Is ‘Our Number One Enemy’


Reported by ROBERT KRAYCHIK |

URL of the originating web site: https://www.breitbart.com/radio/2020/06/25/ann-coulter-woke-corporate-america-is-our-number-one-enemy/

Ann Coulter / AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana

“[Republicans] suck up to the Koch brothers and Sheldon Adelson [and] woke corporate America, which is our enemy,” Coulter said. “Our number one enemy probably is not even the universities or the social justice morons running around on college campus. It really is corporate America, but Republicans just have it in their heads, ‘Ooo, it’s capitalism. We support corporations.’”

LISTEN:

Coulter predicted an acceleration of political censorship on the Internet, including social media deplatforming and domain deregistration, as November’s elections near.

“I have been predicting for years that the Internet is too free,” Coulter said. “We can communicate with one another. We can get information that the New York Times, MSNBC, and CNN simply will not report. They’ve got to shut down the internet to conservatives, and what better time to do it than the year of Trump’s reelection.”

Coulter warned, “As the election gets closer, there are going to be more and more soldiers falling … Where are Republicans on this?”

Internet censorship is a matter of free speech and expression, Coulter held. “That’s what was so great about the internet,” she said. “Even the nutty stuff, it was the Wild West and this is the idea behind free speech, that the truth will rise.”

Coulter added, “They’re not worried about people being misinformed. Nobody gets misinformed except by MSNBC, CNN, the New York Times, ABC, CBS. What they’re worrying about is people being persuaded, and their argument is that anything they disagree with is hurtful, is hate speech, and it must be stopped.”

Democrats are courting political forces beyond their control, assessed Coulter, referring to rioters, looters, and vandals operating amid recent unrest following the death of George Floyd.

Coulter said, “You can’t call the mob off, ‘Okay, boys. It’s November 4th. We’ve defeated Trump. Now everybody settle down.’ That doesn’t happen. You’ve unleashed this beast, and there’s no one there to stop it.”

Breitbart News Tonight broadcasts live on SiriusXM Patriot channel 125 weeknights from 9:00 p.m. to midnight Eastern or 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. Pacific.

Follow Robert Kraychik on Twitter.

BLM Co-Founder Admits Their Goal Is Just To ‘Get Trump Out,’ Alienates Black Trump Supporters


Reported By C. Douglas Golden | Published June 21, 2020 at 1:50pm

It’s probably a good question, before we go forward on a wider cultural discussion that involves unanimous consent for the three-word construct “black lives matter,” what those words really mean. The phrase itself, unless your views on race and culture are rebarbative, is axiomatic and has been since it was coined over a half-decade ago. You could plug almost any  group into the blank space in “_______ lives matter” and you’d be right. This isn’t what it means.

The general conclusion we’ve reached over the gut-wrenching past few weeks, ever since the events leading up to the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis police custody was available to watch by anyone with a cell phone, is that it means something nebulous-ish involving the force of the state being brought to bear on people of color in an inappropriate manner. The problem is that “nebulous-ish” part. The group Black Lives Matter was never quite just an official organization, it also wasn’t just a hashtag. This means that while it currently has one foot in mainstream acceptance, another foot remains in its roots as an organization on the far-ish reaches of the left.

If you wanted evidence of this residual hard-leftist slant, you need have looked no further than Patrisse Cullors’ appearance on CNN on Friday. Cullors was one of the founders of the movement back in 2013 and has remained one of its most prominent voices, which means she’s in demand again. On Friday, she appeared on CNN to discuss the movement and what its goals were. You may not be surprised at one of them:

During the interview on “The Lead,” Jake Tapper and his perma-scrunched face asked Cullors just what is it she wanted to do — at least when it came to the election.

“I’ve heard a lot of criticism of former Vice President Joe Biden from civil rights activists,” Tapper said.

“The election, obviously, will be a choice. How do you think Biden matches up compared to President Trump when it comes to these issues that are important to you?”


The Lead CNN

@TheLeadCNN

President “Trump not only needs to not be in office in November but he should resign now,” says co-founder of the Black Lives Matter Global Network Patrisse Cullors. “Trump needs to be out of office. He is not fit for office.”

1,286 people are talking about this


“Trump not only needs to not be in office in November, but he should resign now,” Cullors said.

“Trump needs to be out of office. He is not fit for office. And so what we are going to push for is a move to get Trump out. While we’re also going to continue to push and pressure Vice President Joe Biden around his policies and relationship to policing and criminalization. That’s going to be important. But our goal is to get Trump out.”

In other words, at a basic level, this isn’t really about black lives — at least not for Cullors. After all, if Cullors’ belief is that all black people are in danger from a bigoted law enforcement structure, the obvious choice would be to work not only with white allies but also black individuals who make common cause with Trump on enough issues to vote for him.

And even though the possibility that Trump has support among black voters, polling from as recently as June 5 shows the incumbent president with black support that should give Democrats nightmares.


Rasmussen Reports

@Rasmussen_Poll

Reader Tip: Coming Later

Our Daily Presidential Tracking poll today shows Black Likely Voter approval of the job @realDonaldTrump is now over 40%.

20K people are talking about this


Of course, Democrats won’t buy that number. And the mainstream media won’t be trying to sell it. But the point is, Rasmussen is a respectable polling organization. If Trump is running at 40 percent black voter support — or even half that number — he’s getting more support in that segment of the electorate than leftists believe.

And if that Rasmussen number is anywhere near correct, the woman who is accepted as speaking for Black Lives Matter is ignoring a substantial number of actual black lives in the United States. But building unity in the black community, or even reaching out to black Trump supporters, is not what this wing of Black Lives Matter is about. It’s about beating Donald Trump.

Now, the thing with Black Lives Matter is that Cullors does not — in fact, cannot — speak for the entire movement. That’s a weakness, both when it comes to organization and leadership, but it’s a strength when it comes to nailing down the protean nature of the organization. Black Lives Matter is more than just a slogan, but the great thing for its principals is that it’s like a slogan: It means exactly what you want it to mean.

It’s also good to know that at the same time Black Lives Matter is demanding redress for centuries-old issues, it’s ostensibly throwing its weight behind the Democratic Party, which was — in some of our lifetimes — the party of segregation and Jim Crow. (And as a relatively young senator in the 1970s, Biden had no problems buddying up to some of its most segregationist members.)

Cullors ignores this racist history.

And notice how Cullors makes it clear that her group needs to need to “pressure Vice President Joe Biden around his policies and relationship to policing and criminalization.” In other words, they know the former veep’s record around policing in this country

But this is just one voice, you may say. True — and therein lies the advantage.

Black Lives Matter is whatever you think it is, at least when it’s ingratiating itself to the public. Give its members a modicum of power, however, and you’ll see that change posthaste, especially in the run-up to the 2020 election.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

A Member of the Bush Family Just Threw His Support Behind Trump


Reported By Erin Coates | Published June 10, 2020 at 11:22am

Texas Land Commissioner George P. Bush endorsed President Donald Trump’s re-election on Tuesday. The son of former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and nephew of former President George W. Bush informed The Dallas Morning News of his intention to vote for Trump in November.

“President Trump is the only thing standing between American and socialism,” Bush said.

He added that “it’s clear” the policies implemented by the Trump administration are working for the country.

“Even in a global pandemic where we have had to take unprecedented measures to protect public health, the economy is already returning,” Bush said.

“It’s clear, America and Texas will continue to be stronger than ever.”

Trump thanked Bush for his endorsement on Twitter, saying that it was a “great honor.”


Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump

Thank you George, great honor! https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1270488116424564743 

The Hill

@thehill

George P. Bush says he’ll vote for Trump: “Only thing standing between America and socialism” http://hill.cm/goPLYjm 

View image on Twitter
52K people are talking about this


The younger Bush’s endorsement comes on the heels of a New York Times report saying many top Republican leaders will not be voting for Trump. The Times cited people familiar with the family’s thinking who said George W. Bush won’t support the president’s re-election and Jeb Bush is still unsure how he will vote in November.

Former President Bush’s spokesman, Freddy Ford, told The Texas Tribune that The Times’ report was wrong.

“This is completely made up,” Ford said. “He is retired from presidential politics and has not indicated how he will vote.”

Trump tweeted an article reporting Ford’s statement but did not make any other comment on it. The president took shots at George P. Bush’s father during the 2016 election, calling him “Low Energy Jeb.”


Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump

Low energy Jeb Bush just endorsed a man he truly hates, Lyin’ Ted Cruz. Honestly, I can’t blame Jeb in that I drove him into oblivion!

5,703 people are talking about this


However, the younger Bush and Trump have supported each other in their political endeavors, and the president has called him the “Bush that got it right.”

“I like him,” Trump said, adding that he is a “friend of my son and he’s a great guy.”

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Pelosi Catches Fire for New Low in Pandering: Kneels Before Introducing ‘Justice in Policing’ Act


Reported By Joe Saunders | Published June 8, 2020 at 12:21pm

Nancy Pelosi has been lowering herself — and American politics — for decades now. But on Monday, she did it literally.

As the country heads into President Donald Trump’s 2020 re-election bid, the crassly opportunistic (and maliciously anti-Trump) House speaker clearly hopes to capitalize on a wave of anti-police sentiment, stemming from the May 25 death of George Floyd after a Minneapolis police officer knelt on his neck for roughly nine minutes during an arrest, to defeat Trump’s campaign.

Claiming that police are the real problem, Democrats at the local level are working to defund police forces in their communities — and leave the minorities they claim to care about even more vulnerable to crime. The mainstream media is doing its ever-predictable part by portraying an astonishing orgy of riot and looting as some kind of heir to the dignified, morally driven protests of the civil rights movement.

And now comes House Speaker Pelosi herself, ostentatiously taking a knee in the ornate surroundings of Emancipation Hall (formerly the Great Hall) in the nation’s Capitol before introducing a bill to put a new set of federal regulations onto the nation’s locally controlled police forces.

The bill, officially known as the Justice in Policing Act,” is ostensibly intended to “hold law enforcement accountable in court, improve transparency through data collection, and reform police training and policies.” What it’s more likely intended to do is whip up Democratic voters heading into the November election, and provide a patina of legislative covering to continuing unrest in overwhelmingly Democratic-controlled cities.

“The martyrdom of George Floyd gave American experience a moment of national anguish as we grieve for the black Americans killed by police brutality,” a somewhat garbled Pelosi said at a news conference after the kneeling ceremony.

“Today, this movement of national anguish is being transformed into a movement of national action as Americans from across the country peacefully protest to demand an end to injustice.”

For Democrats, it probably looked like a moment of perfect political theater.

But some of the online reviews were appropriately damning:


Nader Haidar@nader_haidar

the queen of hypocrites

See Nader Haidar’s other Tweets


Uri Blago@UriBlago

Is this cultural appropriation or pandering?

Answer: Both

View image on Twitter
See Uri Blago’s other Tweets


Jason A. Foust@JasonAFoust1

😂😂😂What a joke! I guess this is what they were wanting to do for Jussie Smollett.

See Jason A. Foust’s other Tweets


It’s interesting that this is a Democratic proposal, given that the highest-profile incidents of “police brutality” that Democrats seem to think is suddenly on an epidemic scale in the nation seem to crop up mainly in cities where Democrats have been in control for decades. Minneapolis, for instance, where Floyd died and where the city council now wants to disband the police force, is made up entirely of Democrats but for one Green Party member.

  • New York City, where a black vendor of illegal cigarettes named Eric Garner died after being arrested by police back in 2014, is staunchly Democratic.
  • Baltimore, where the death of a drug dealer named Freddie Gray in 2015 set off days of rioting, hasn’t had a Republican mayor since 1967, as Breitbart has noted.

Its elected officials at the local and federal level (including the late Elijah Cummings) have done nothing to prevent Charm City from a descent into slums. These are just a few examples, and every American, Democrat and Republican, knows the truth.

Yet Democrats see themselves as the force to reform American police agencies? The reality is that the party is throwing anything it can at Trump and the possibility he will serve another term in the White House.

The three-year national nightmare known as the “Russia collusion” probe came up deservedly empty. The impeachment affair from the first month of the year was so ludicrous it’s almost hard to remember — at a remove of six months — the exact lies Rep. Adam Schiff and Co. were peddling.

When the coronavirus hit, Democrats thought they had their issue, but Trump’s handling of it compared far too favorably with other world leaders — and especially favorably to the obvious ineptitude of Democratic governors like New York’s Andrew Cuomo and rumored Democratic vice presidential possibility Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan.

So now Pelosi’s Democrats have turned to the death of George Floyd and a national outbreak of looting and violence to try to convince American voters that the real problem the country has is racist police officers. It’s a desperate attempt to rally a dispirited Democratic base in time to win a 2020 election in which Democrats have pinned their hopes on a 77-year-old Joe Biden whose chief strength in the Democratic primaries was that he wasn’t Bernie Sanders.

He’s a man with a lifetime’s worth of political baggage, including the 1994 crime bill that Democrats despise today and a questionable past with China, not to mention endless accusations of improper behavior with women, as well as one serious claim of sexual assault.

Pelosi’s career has made clear for years that there’s really no depth she will not lower herself for the sake of political power — for herself and her party. On Monday, in the Capitol’s Emancipation Hall, she did it literally, for the whole world to see. And every voter needs to remember it in November.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: 

Nolte: Politico Admits Democrats ‘Dread’ Fast Economic Rebound


Reported by JOHN NOLTE | 

URL of the originating web site: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/05/26/nolte-politico-admits-democrats-dread-fast-economic-rebound/spencer-davis-yqXH4v6UTJA-unsplash

Spencer Davis / Unsplash

Thanks to these lockdowns, some 40 million people are unemployed, some 40 million lives have been shattered; lines at food pantries seem to go on forever; countless small businesses are in danger of closing or already have… Nevertheless, what America’s oh-so compassionate Democrats dread most is a quick economic rebound that might undermine their grasping desire to hold on to and obtain power.

“The general election scenario that Democrats are dreading,” the Politico headline reads.

 And what is that scenario?

“We are about to see the best economic data we’ve seen in the history of this country,” a former economic adviser to Barack Obama told a bunch of bigwigs from both parties last month.

His name is Jason Furman and Politico says he “laid out a detailed case for why the months preceding the November election could offer Trump the chance to brag — truthfully — about the most explosive monthly employment numbers and GDP growth ever.”

Furman’s counterintuitive pitch has caused some Democrats, especially Obama alumni, around Washington to panic. “This is my big worry,” said a former Obama White House official who is still close to the former president. Asked about the level of concern among top party officials, he said, “It’s high — high, high, high, high.”

And top policy officials on the Biden campaign are preparing for a fall economic debate that might look very different than the one predicted at the start of the pandemic in March. “They are very much aware of this,” said an informal adviser.

What Furman already sees are signs of what’s known as a “V” recovery, as a opposed to a slower or gradual  recovery,  or a recovery that takes a while to get back to where we were before these stupid lockdowns began. Furman sees an economy that’s already unleashed.

Consumption and hiring started to tick up “in gross terms, not in net terms,” Furman said, describing the phenomenon as a “partial rebound.” The bounce back “can be very very fast, because people go back to their original job, they get called back from furlough, you put the lights back on in your business. Given how many people were furloughed and how many businesses were closed you can get a big jump out of that. It will look like a V.”

Furman’s argument is not that different from the one made by White House economic advisers and Trump, who have predicted an explosive third quarter, and senior adviser Jared Kushner, who said in late April that “the hope is that by July the country’s really rocking again.”

White House officials were thrilled to hear that some of their views have been endorsed by prominent Democrats.

While no one expects the second quarter numbers — the numbers that will tell us the GDP between April 1 and June 30 — to be anything but terrible, if we can come to our senses nationwide and get these absurd lockdowns behind us, the third quarter numbers (that will be released at the end of September) could show real growth. This would be good for the incumbent president, especially since that incumbent president has been predicting a “pent up” desire within the American people to get back to normal.

Good news for America and Americans would, of course, be terrible news for Joe Biden, who is desperate to strangle our economy with record high taxes and an obscene amount of regulations. Biden’s policies would hurt a flourishing economy, but they would kill a post-lockdown recovery in the same way the Obama-Biden economic policies of 2009 killed any hope of a real rebound after the 2008 economic crash. It’s no accident the Obama-Biden administration oversaw the worst “recovery” since the Great Depression. Their taxes, regulations, and constant threats of more kept a boot firmly on the neck of our economy for eight long years.

Plus, no matter how much Biden might crybaby about Trump’s Twitter account, his golf game, and his violation of the establishment’s “precious norms,” the American people tend not to fire a president when the economy is humming — especially if we are coming out of a downturn.

But what does it say about Democrats that with nearly 40 million lives shattered, they “dread” a fast comeback for those 40 million people?

Obviously, that’s a rhetorical question, but it does answer the question as to why — and for no valid scientific or medical reasons, a number of mercenary Democrat governors are desperate to push these pointless lockdowns as far into next month as possible (especially in swing states like Wisconsin, Michigan, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania).

It is all about doing whatever damage they can to those third quarter GDP numbers; even if that means more pain for those who cannot work from home — primarily the working class.

Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNCFollow his Facebook Page here.

University Won’t Release 1,850 Boxes of Biden Records That Could Confirm Tara Reade’s Story


Reported By C. Douglas Golden | Published April 30, 2020 at 8:02am

Almost a year ago to the day, HuffPost broke a bit of news that was disconcerting, if not necessarily urgent at the time:

The University of Delaware, home to almost 2,000 boxes of records from Joe Biden’s career in the Senate, was already three months late in making those documents available to the public and was pushing their release back to the end of 2019 at the earliest.

The school — Biden’s alma mater — had originally said the papers would “remain closed during processing for a period no sooner than two years after the donor retires from any public office.” Biden had left public office on Jan. 20, 2017, but apparently the university hadn’t finished “processing” them or whatever, which is why the release date had to be changed.

“The Biden senatorial papers are indeed still closed, pending completion of processing (still underway) and as per our agreement with the donor, which is that the papers would remain closed until the later date of 12/31/2019 or two years after the donor retires [from] public service,” Biden papers curator L. Rebecca Johnson Melvin told HuffPost at the time.

I’m writing about this now, so guess what wasn’t released on Dec. 31, 2019?

You would think, given the time-sensitive nature of all of this, that the University of Delaware would have hurried up the process — unless hurrying up the process wasn’t the point, and was, in fact, antithetical to the point. Then again, unless you were someone like me who follows this kind of thing for a living, this didn’t seem all that important. What was going to be contained in those papers, after all?

Sure, there could be some ugly stuff in there about Biden’s role as the head of the Senate Judiciary Committee during the Clarence Thomas/Anita Hill hearings. But Biden’s behavior during those hearings had been a matter of public discussion for decades. The chances of anything new coming out were pretty low.

There could be further letters with the arch-segregationist senators with whom he made common cause in order to kill off federally mandated racial busing. But busing hasn’t been a hot-button issue in so long, many Americans old enough to vote might not even be familiar with the controversy.

Then came the Tara Reade sexual assault allegation, and things took a turn. What’s amazing is that, despite the fact there’s at least some contemporaneous corroboration for Reade’s claim, the mainstream media doesn’t want to talk about it or find the evidence for it that the former Senate aide says is out there. Most notably, Reade told The New York Times she filed a complaint with the Senate personnel office around the time of the alleged 1993 sexual assault.

Reade says she doesn’t have a copy of the complaint, nor do Senate officials. However, as Campus Reform noted Wednesday, the University of Delaware just might. They’re not going to release it, though — at least not according to the archivists, who, according to Campus Reform, are still giving the same response to interviewers as they were giving back in April of 2019. This time, however, it’s a bit different, since that response is coming to questions related to a serious charge against a potential president of the United States, who is not only his party’s presumptive nominee but is even leading in national polls at the moment.

A petition published by the opposition research group America Rising PAC is calling on the university to release the documents.

“Joe Biden is facing an allegation of sexual assault by a former Senate staffer. New details are emerging every week, however he has yet to be asked a single question about the allegation by mainstream media,” the petition states.

“Currently, all of the documents from Biden’s career in the U.S. Senate remain under lock and key at the University of Delaware. The documents and complaints that may shed light on this alleged sexual assault could sit in those very files.’

And said documents will remain unreleased. According to Campus Reform, University of Delaware director of external relations Andrea Boyle said– you’ll never believe this — that the documents are “still being processed.”

However, there’s been another change in the university’s language regarding the papers’ release. Instead of the whole thing about retiring from “public service,” Boyle told Campus Reform that “the entire collection will remain closed to the public until two years after Mr. Biden retires from public life.”

Let’s put that in perspective: Joe Biden was a senator in his early 30s and remained in that role for the better part of 40 years, after which he became the vice president of the United States. Then, after the 2016 election, he became the Democrat candidate-in-waiting. He’s now the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. Come November, he’ll either be the president-elect or the guy who lost to Donald Trump. Either way, he’s likely to spend the rest of his life governing and/or opining upon governance.

In short, Joe Biden will retire from public life when he’s embalmed or cremated. Two years afterward, we’ll apparently discover whether there were any documents in his files relating to Tara Reade’s sexual assault allegation against Biden. Hope you can wait until then, people.

I don’t want to say this is incriminating, but all Biden has to do is release the documents and we’ll know whether or not there’s anything in there relating to Reade. Certainly, there have to be trained archivists the University of Delaware can hire to speed up the process — or to simply look at the documents relating to that period in Biden’s career and see if there’s any there there.

For that matter, Biden himself could give the university permission to release papers as they relate to at least that part of his career. Considering Biden hasn’t addressed Reade’s accusation publicly so far, the chances of that happening are minimal, but the option is always there.

If none of that happens, sure, there’ll be conspiracy theorists who’ll still believe the University of Delaware was complicit in some great scandal to extirpate the evidence from Biden’s records, but they’ll be relegated to dodgy websites and the late-night AM airwaves. For the rest of us, we’ll have to be satisfied that if the absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence, there’s certainly an absence of evidence.

Instead, what the University of Delaware is telling us is that it’s not done processing the documents — but not that this matters, since we’re never going to see them in time for the election. The short-term administrative excuse, in other words, is nothing more than a preface to the long-term political one.

What are we supposed to make of this, then? Nothing to see here — so time to stop looking?

This would be a marginally acceptable answer if those inquiring were scavenging for more Anita Hill-related material or love letters to segregationists. A sexual assault allegation is quite a bit different, though, particularly when Biden’s papers can provide yet more contemporaneous corroboration — if not the report Reade filed.

This, in short, is no longer just a matter of finding detritus about Biden’s iffy past political opinions and affiliations. It’s about whether there’s evidence of an allegation of forcible sexual misconduct against a man who wants to be president of the United States.

If the University of Delaware can’t or won’t answer that question, then the University of Delaware shouldn’t be in possession of these documents.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Senators Who Fought Kavanaugh Found Stumping for Biden Morning After Allegation Evidence Discovered


Commentary By Andrew J. Sciascia | Published April 26, 2020 at 6:41am

It was a shocking news-break Friday as reports indicated evidence had emerged supporting former Senate aide Tara Reade’s sexual assault allegations against presumptive 2020 Democratic presidential primary nominee Joe Biden. Potentially more shocking, however, were Saturday morning developments that seemed to suggest that — just like that — the American left’s zero-tolerance, “Believe All Women” approach to sexual assault allegations against prominent figures in the D.C. political establishment had been put to rest.

According to The Intercept, video was found this week in the archives of CNN’s “Larry King Live” revealing an on-air phone call in 1993 in which a female caller complained that her daughter had had nowhere to turn for help with unspecified “problems” while working for a “prominent senator.” The caller is believed to have been Reade’s now-deceased mother.

Receiving incredibly little attention from the establishment media, Reade came forward in March with allegations Biden had, while she was a staffer in his office in 1993, forced himself upon her in private in a hallway in the Capitol complex, kissing her and penetrating her with his fingers.

Confirmation the “Larry King Live” caller was, in fact, Reade’s mother would support Reade’s claims that she had confided in others and considered coming forward shortly after the alleged assault would have taken place.

Still, the news about the phone call wasn’t enough to stop Democratic senators, and former bitter primary opponents, from expressing support for Biden just 24 hours later on social media. Likely still vying for a vice presidential nod, the senators were eager Saturday morning to kiss the boots of their good friend Biden, joining him in promoting a campaign event titled S.O.U.L. of the Nation Saturday.

Coming on the one-year anniversary of Biden’s campaign announcement, “SOUL Saturday” — for service, outreach, unity and leadership — is described as a day dedicated to celebrating American “communities’ heroes” in a time of crisis.

Coincidentally, the event also plays on Biden’s running narrative regarding his candidacy — which he describes as an attempt to “reclaim” the soul of America from the hands of mean, old President Donald Trump.

And wouldn’t you know it, Democratic Sens. Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, Kirsten Gillibrand and Cory Booker had no problem slapping on fake smiles, painting their former opponent with rehearsed compliments and quoting his campaign slogans.

“I’m so grateful to be teaming up with [Joe Biden] to recognize all of the heroes fighting for us on the front lines,” Booker wrote in a Twitter post alongside a promotional video. “The biggest thing you can do today is a small act of kindness for someone else — so please, join us in this day of service.”

“Today I’m joining my friend [Joe Biden] and people across our nation who are coming together to take part in #SOULSaturday,” wrote Harris, whose most notable moment of campaign popularity came from insinuating Biden was an old racist.

“Let’s use this moment to show our appreciation for those on the front lines and connect with our friends and neighbors. We’re all in this together.”

Of course, no such pleasantries were made regarding then-D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Brett Kavanaugh by any of the aforementioned senators at the time of his 2018 Supreme Court confirmation. In fact, Booker, Harris and Klobuchar were all clearly using their positions on the Senate Judiciary Committee at the time of the Kavanaugh proceedings as a springboard for their eventual failed White House bids.

This is not to say sexual assault allegations should be taken lightly or ignored. To the contrary, they should be heard and investigated with the utmost seriousness and empathy. But presumption of innocence and all manner of due process were flung to the wind when Christine Blasey Ford, Ph.D., came forward with consistently uncorroborated claims Kavanaugh had assaulted her at a party in high school. One allegation led to more and more still, each one less credible than the last.

Stories of a high school-aged Kavanaugh taking part in methodically planned date-rape rings and thrusting his genitals upon an unsuspecting woman at a Yale University party were all welcomed by Democrats and the media as though they were equally valid — because, once again, you had to “Believe All Women.” That is why Gillibrand repeatedly told the media and the nation that Ford had “no reason to lie,” according to CNN. That is why Klobuchar used her time questioning the judge as an opportunity to grandstand, assassinating his character with implications that his collegiate drinking habits somehow made him a sex criminal as well.

But I guess it’s too much to ask the same level of scrutiny be applied to Biden, even hours after the allegations against him seem to have taken on teeth.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: 

Flashback: Adam Schiff Hijacked House Intelligence Hearing on China to Subpoena a Russian Translator


Reported by KRISTINA WONG | 

URL of the originating website: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/04/19/flashback-adam-schiff-hijacked-intel-hearing-china-subpoena-russian-translator/

Schiff / Drew Angerer /Getty Images

“The House Republicans have been running an investigation into China on the Intelligence Committee for many, many years…so we’ve been on this for awhile, and remember, we were dealing with the Russian hoax in Congress at the same time the House Republicans were trying to run an investigation into China,” he said on Fox and Friends.

“And the Democrats — finally we had a public hearing on this — and they hijacked the hearing to try to subpoena whatever Russian of the week they were looking after. So this has been a challenge for us, to get Russia on the forefront, and now, both Republicans and Democrats realize this,” he said.

Nunes was referring to the July 19, 2018, hearing on China held by Nunes, when he was the chairman of the Intelligence Committee. The hearing’s topic was “China’s threat to American government and private sector research and innovation leadership.” During the hearing, then-Ranking Schiff began his opening remarks, not on China, but with his concerns about President Trump meeting alone with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki, Finland, earlier that month, and then raised a motion to subpoena the interpreter who attended the meeting. The hearing then devolved into confusion over whether Schiff was able to raise that motion, forcing Nunes to call for a recess. The witnesses — four top China experts — were left to talk to committee staff and among themselves, as Breitbart News reported at the time.

After the recess, Republicans voted to table the motion. Schiff demanded a recorded vote.

“Schiff has decided to turn this hearing into a Russia clown show,” a house staffer said.

Schiff, or his staff, later tweeted about his failed attempt to subpoena the interpreter at the China hearing.

“BREAKING: @RepSwalwell and I just made a motion in House Intel Committee to subpoena the American interpreter during the summit — the only witness to Trump’s meeting with Putin. This is an extraordinary remedy, but Trump’s actions necessitate it. Republicans voted it down.”

Republicans also say Democrats’ singular focus on impeaching Trump also distracted Congress earlier this year, when the coronavirus spread. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) scheduled a vote on impeachment articles on Trump the same day the first person from Wuhan, China, arrived to the United States, on January 15. She passed out commemorative signing pens and encouraged Americans to watch the House impeachment managers bring the articles over to the Senate.

The White House stood up its coronavirus task force on January 29, and ordered a ban on travel from China on January 31, the same day the World Health Organization acknowledged that the coronavirus was a global health emergency. However, the Senate impeachment trial continued until February 5.

Follow Breitbart News’s Kristina Wong on Twitter or on Facebook.

Pollak: Democrats Pushed Impeachment While Coronavirus Spread


Reported by Joel B. Pollak | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/03/13/pollak-democrats-pushed-impeachment-while-coronavirus-spread/

House Financial Services Committee Chairwoman Maxine Waters, D-Calif., holds up a pen presented to her by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of Calif., after she signed the resolution to transmit the two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump to the Senate for trial on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Jan. …
Susan Walsh / Associated Press
We now know the cost of impeachment.
 

While Democrats were diverting the attention and energy of the entire country into a pointless trial that could not possibly have ended in anything other than President Donald Trump’s acquittal, the coronavirus pandemic was beginning in China and arriving in the United States.

The timeline of the two developments — impeachment and coronavirus — is shocking, and reveals the true cost of hyper-partisanship.

  • January 11: Chinese state media report the first known death from an illness originating in the Wuhan market.
  • January 15: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) holds a vote to send articles of impeachment to the Senate. Pelosi and House Democrats celebrate the “solemn” occasion with a signing ceremony, using commemorative pens.
  • January 21: The first person with coronavirus arrives in the United States from China, where he had been in Wuhan.
  • January 23: The House impeachment managers make their opening arguments for removing President Trump.
  • January 23: China closes off the city of Wuhan completely to slow the spread of coronavirus to the rest of China.
  • January 30: Senators begin asking two days of questions of both sides in the president’s impeachment trial.
  • January 30: The World Health Organization declares a global health emergency as coronavirus continues to spread.
  • January 31: The Senate holds a vote on whether to allow further witnesses and documents in the impeachment trial.
  • January 31: President Trump declares a national health emergency and imposes a ban on travel to and from China. Former Vice President Joe Biden calls Trump’s decision “hysterical xenophobia … and fear-mongering.”
  • February 2: The first death from coronavirus outside China is reported in the Philippines.
  • February 3: House impeachment managers begin closing arguments, calling Trump a threat to national security.
  • February 4: President Trump talks about coronavirus in his State of the Union address; Pelosi rips up every page.
  • February 5: The Senate votes to acquit President Trump on both articles of impeachment, 52-48 and 53-47.
  • February 5: House Democrats finally take up coronavirus in the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Asia.

For twenty days, from the day the first death from coronavirus was known, Democrats did nothing about it. They were too busy with the president’s impeachment trial — a trial Pelosi had delayed unnecessarily for several weeks.

To the extent that they commented on coronavirus at all, it was only to tear up the president’s remarks or to call him a racist. They told the nation that he, not coronavirus, was a threat to the national security of the United States.

In the midst of that all-consuming trial, it is remarkable Trump was able to do anything else at all. But he did, and one of the things he did was impose the China travel ban, just one day after the World Health Organization declared coronavirus a global health emergency, and the day before the first victim of the pandemic died outside China.

For his trouble, he was criticized by the World Health Organization and called “hysterical” by his future 2020 rival.

When Republicans warned Democrats that impeachment was a waste of time, a divisive partisan exercise, and a distraction from the real issues facing the country — a lesson Republicans learned the hard way, in Bill Clinton’s impeachment, 21 years before — Democrats ignored them.

Just a few weeks later, our divided leaders were taken by surprise by the pandemic, and bickered on cable news, asking why nothing was done sooner.

But we know why.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). He earned an A.B. in Social Studies and Environmental Science and Public Policy from Harvard College, and a J.D. from Harvard Law School. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

 

please likeand share and leave a comment

Autoworker Threatened by Biden Unveils Hilarious Custom ‘AR-14’


Reported By C. Douglas Golden | Published March 16, 2020 at 8:59am

Michigan union millwright Jerry Wayne became a viral superstar when he engaged in a confrontation with former Vice President Joe Biden over the Second Amendment. To mark the life event, he decided on a memento, as so many of us do. He decided on a rifle — namely, an “AR-14.”

Those of you who remember the confrontation — it feels so long ago, given what’s happened with the coronavirus in the interim — will remember the fact that Biden forgot the name of the popular AR-15 firearm while telling him that he didn’t have a right to own one (or that he needed “100 rounds”). He also apparently forgot the fact that cameras were on him, calling the man a “horse’s a–” and “full of s—,” telling him that he’d take him “outside.” Presumably, that wasn’t so they could socially distance.

Here’s the video, which contains all of the unbleeped language. Viewer discretion is advised:

And here it is at floor level at the Detroit auto plant, just in case you needed a bit more of Joe Biden’s meltdowns:

And now, the AR-14 is a real thing — and Wayne is the star of a National Rifle Association ad. Again, bad language, viewer discretion is advised.

The gun, as you can see, has “AR-14” and “You’re full of s—!” etched onto the side, along with Joe Biden’s angry visage.

Wayne said he “got this the day after I talked to Joe. I’m sure that’s not the result he was going for.”

He also noted Biden lied when he said he didn’t say he was going to take away people’s firearms when he was with former presidential candidate and noted white privilege archetype Beto O’Rourke. O’Rourke, who was famous for his declaration that “hell yes, we’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47,” recently endorsed Biden, and Biden seemed to reciprocate: “You’re gonna take care of the gun problem with me,” Biden said in a March 2 appearance with O’Rourke in Dallas.

In the NRA video, Biden is also seen on CNN talking about how he would take away so-called “assault weapons.”

“The fact of the matter is, they should be illegal,” Biden said. “Period.”

“Americans should be able to ask candidates seeking the highest office what’s going to happen to their rights as they vote them into office,” Wayne said in the video.

“Joe Biden can call me all the names he wants, but it doesn’t change the fact that he’s on video promising to have Beto O’Rourke lead the effort on gun confiscation.”

“I am sick and tired of having to defend the fact that we need guns to defend our homes and hunt wildlife,” Wayne added.

“I don’t need an excuse to have 100 rounds. I’ve got the Constitution of the United States.”

The key question Wayne asked, however, might have been this: “Why is it that the people who want to take away our guns know absolutely nothing about them?”

Yes, why? Why is this always the same state of affairs? Not only was Joe Biden one digit short on the name of the rifle he wants to ban, he apparently thought it was already banned. Whatever the case, it was obvious Biden wasn’t on terra firma when it came to firearms.

And yet, he feels perfectly happy telling us what laws he’s going to pass regarding them.

Jerry Wayne’s confrontation with Biden may have gotten lost in more pressing things in the intervening week, but one hopes when COVID-19 is sorted out, we won’t have forgotten it.

Wayne certainly won’t — he’ll be able to look at the quote every time he goes to the range.

ABOUT THE REPORTER: 

Nolte: Cenk Uygur Exposes Media’s ‘Biden Is Still Sharp’ Gaslighting Campaign


Reported by John Nolte | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/03/05/nolte-cenk-uygur-exposes-medias-biden-is-still-sharp-gaslighting-campaign/

PLAYA VISTA, CA – MAY 09: Cenk Uygur attends the Young Turks celebration of 1 billion views at YouTube LA on May 9, 2013 in Playa Vista, California. (Photo by Joe Scarnici/Getty Images for The Young Turks) 

Young Turks founder and co-host Cenk Uygur fears the ongoing media cover-up of Joe Biden’s mental decline will ensure Donald Trump’s reelection.

In the wake of Biden’s shocking Super Tuesday comeback, Uygur, a passionate Bernie Sanders supporter, lashed out at the establishment media, not only for covering up what he describes as Biden’s “lies, lies, lies,” but the fact that Biden is “either near senile, or actually senile.”

“Biden is either near senile, or actually senile. Watch any of the tapes. Biden lies non-stop. He’s going to get caught,” Ugyur told his online audience, adding, “Okay, the media is covering for him, but they’re not going to be able to cover when the Republicans come for him, and when Trump comes for him.”

Uygur cited a specific example, Biden’s utterly bizarre claim he had been arrested in South Africa 30 years ago to show his support for Nelson Mandela. On at least three occasions in the days leading up to Super Tuesday, Sanders told this lie.

“Joe Biden did not get arrested with Nelson Mandela,” Uygur accurately pointed out. “Who makes up a lie like that? An incredibly stupid person makes up a lie like that; an incredibly immoral person makes up a lie like that.”

In some places, Uygur’s monologue is being characterized as a meltdown, but it’s really not. He’s obviously frustrated over Bernie’s loss, especially after being so certain the Jurassic Marxist had it in the bag, but he’s not melting down, just passionate and frustrated.

Watch for yourself:

Here are some of the highlights:

I know the progressive base and I know the establishment, and I know we’re going to go to war, and a war like you’ve never seen because progressives online are not going to go quietly… They’re not going to be like, “Oh, Joe Biden’s senile, we’ll let it go.”

Joe Biden did not get arrested with Nelson Mandela. Who makes up a lie like that? An incredibly stupid person makes up a lie like that; an incredibly immoral person makes up a lie like that.

Biden is not going to beat Trump. Biden is either near senile or actually senile. Watch any of the tapes. Biden lies non-stop. He’s going to get caught. Okay, the media is covering for him, but they’re not going to be able to cover when the Republicans come for him and when Trump comes for him. He’s not going to beat Trump. The establishment candidate is less likely to beat Trump anyway. We just had 2016, the establishment candidate lost to a doofus like Trump.

And now, here we go, an establishment candidate that is far worse, with his mental faculties under question… And you’re going to run that guy against Trump?

This is a rare moment — or maybe the first ever — where Uygur and conservative writer Ann Coulter agree.

During her appearance on Tuesday’s edition of SiriusXM’s Breitbart News Tonight, author of Resistance Is Futile!: How the Trump-Hating Left Lost Its Collective Mind said, “The media will protect Biden in a way that no Republican with that level of senile dementia that Biden has could run for president.”

“The media is a powerful force,” she added. “They’ll cover it up, they won’t show us those. There is Twitter and Breitbart to get those things out.”

Biden has always been one to put his foot in his mouth. Nevertheless, there is no question he is not the man he was during his vice presidential days. He’s physically frail, mentally frail, and there has even been a notable decline over the course of the Democrat primary.

Running for president is exhausting, and I suspect Trump intends to do what he did to Hillary Clinton, which is to work his 2020 opponent — be it 77-year-old Biden, or 78-year-old Bernie — into the ground.

The media can try to cover up Biden’s cognitive decline, or try to spin it as something charming about good ol’ Uncle Joe, but the media world is an entirely different place now. It’s no longer 2008, where the media can cover up Barack Obama’s troubling racial past, or 2012 where they can cover up a Benghazi. The media bent over backwards in threes to cover up Hillary Clinton’s 2016 health issues — and that cover up failed.

What’s more, nothing changes the fact that when Biden is up on that stage, be it at a debate or rally, it’s just him and him alone, and as we have seen over the past few months, this almost always results in disaster.

Keep the following in mind…

One of the reasons Biden sailed through Super Tuesday was the lack of media focus on him the weeks prior. He’d been written off for dead, no one was paying much attention, so the troubling pileup of brain freezes he suffered during those crucial days — including the fantasy about being arrested — got almost no attention.

That all changes now.

And if he wins the primary, the spotlight will intensify even more, as will Trump’s fearlessness when it comes to capitalizing on Biden’s decline. And if the fake news media don’t want to cover it — New Media and social media will be happy to step in. 

Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC. Follow his Facebook Page here.

Bernie Sanders: I’ll Drop Out if Biden Has Most Delegates at Convention


Reported by Joshua Caplan | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2020/03/05/bernie-sanders-ill-drop-out-if-biden-has-most-delegates-at-convention/

U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders speaking with attendees at the Clark County Democratic Party’s 2020 Kick Off to Caucus Gala at the Tropicana Las Vegas in Las Vegas, Nevada. Gage Skidmore/Flickr

Appearing Wednesday on MSNBC’s The Rachel Maddow Show, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) said he will drop out of the Democratic presidential primary if former Vice President Joe Biden has a plurality of pledged delegates heading into the Democratic National Convention.

A partial transcript is as follows: 

RACHEL MADDOW: If, at the end of the day, it turns out that Vice President Biden is going to have more delegates than you do heading into the convention, will you drop out?

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS: Of course I’m gonna drop out; he will win. I mean, I suspect, we will run through the process, and I think people have a right to vote. But if Biden walks into the convention, or at the end of the process has more votes than me, he’s the winner.

MADDOW: And that’s true whether or not he has a majority or a just plurality?

SEN. SANDERS: Absolutely, that’s what I’ve said. Look, here’s the story, and there’s some confusion about this. Last time around in 2016, you talked about 2016, you’ll remember that before the very first vote was cast in Iowa, Hillary Clinton had 500 superdelegates at her side. She walked into the campaign with 500 superdelegates. I thought that was totally outrageous, absurd, and undemocratic. We fought very hard in the Democratic rules process to get rid of all superdelegates. That is my preference. I think it should be the decision of the people, not Washington insiders. We lost, but what we did get is not getting rid of all super delegates at the convention voting, but that on the first ballot there won’t be any superdelegates voting.

Over 1.8 Million Republican Texans Voted for Donald Trump in Unopposed Presidential Primary


Reported by Charlie Spiering | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/03/04/over-1-8-million-republican-texans-voted-for-donald-trump-in-unopposed-presidential-primary/

Donald Trump smiles at State of the Union (Win McNamee / AFP / Getty)

President Donald Trump did not face a serious Republican challenger in Texas, but he still earned nearly two million votes in the state for his re-election.

Trump received 1,871,515 total votes in the Texas Republican primary on Tuesday, with 99.5 percent of the vote reporting. That’s more than the top four remaining Democrats combined, as currently former Vice President Joe Biden, Sen. Bernie Sanders, Michael Bloomberg, and Elizabeth Warren have earned a total of 1.7 million votes in Texas, with 91.3 percent of the vote reporting, although the Democrat votes are still being counted.

Trump received the most votes ever for an incumbent president running in Texas.

Fifteen years ago, 635,948 Republican Texans voted for then-President George W. Bush in the 2004 Republican primary. In 2012, 520,410 Democrats voted for then-President Barack Obama in their primary.

Texan Republicans did have a Senate primary in the state in 2020, but Sen. John Cornyn was the easy winner with 74 percent of the vote.

Nolte: Media-Approved Hate Crimes Against Trump Supporters Explode Post-Acquittal


Written by John Nolte | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2020/02/14/nolte-media-approved-hate-crimes-against-trump-supporters-explode-post-acquittal/

A girl sits in a van next to an anti-Donald Trump poster during a demonstration against the US president in Brussels on May 24, 2017. US President Donald Trump is on a two-day visit to Belgium, to attend a NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) summit on May 25. / AFP … BRUNO FAHY/AFP/Getty

Nothing proves “silence is consent” more than the media establishment’s revealing indifference in the face of a recent wave of violent attacks and threats against Trump supporters.

First, a little background…

As of March of 2019, Breitbart News documented 332 separate, media-approved political hate crimes committed against Trump supporters. This list includes physical assaults, vandalism, and the open encouragement of violence against individuals and groups based only on their personal beliefs. Sadly, through its deafening silence and indifference, the corporate media not only give consent to commit acts of political violence against those of us on the right, as we have seen on countless occasions — especially at the far-left CNN — the media regularly encourage and openly call for violence against Trump and his supporters. And now the violence is once again exploding…

With the Russia Collusion Hoax exposed, President Trump forever acquitted of a frame-job impeachment, a Democrat presidential field filled with hapless, white, decrepit millionaires and billionaires; the president piling up a list of solid accomplishments and his re-election looking more likely by the day, the impotent rage of the media is increasing, and this is obviously spilling over into the public at large, which is why we have seen at least seven hate crimes against Trump supporters in just over a week.

  • February 9, 2020: Man Arrested for Driving Car Through GOP Voter Registration Booth

Witnesses told JSO that a man in his 20s driving an older brown Chevy van pulled up to the tent before driving through, running over their tables and chairs. Volunteers for the Republican Party were registering people to vote.

No volunteers were hurt, according to JSO. Witnesses said the driver of the van, stopped the vehicle, got out of the van and took a video while making obscene gestures before he left.

The vandalism occurred around 2:37 a.m. Saturday. Surveillance video picked up a vehicle parking in the lot outside the building. A man walked out of the vehicle with a can of spray paint in his hands, went over to the front of the building and spray-painted the words “Still Traitors” in yellow and gold paint on the stucco front of the headquarters.

  • February 10, 2020: California GOP Headquarters Vandalized for Sixth Time in Two Years

The latest act of vandalism at the Humboldt County Republican headquarters in Eureka is the sixth of its kind in just two years, though the damage this time may be far more costly than prior incidents, the party’s local chair said Monday.

“This was above and beyond anything that’s happened before,” said John Schutt. “Windows were broken and the suspect had thrown rocks, too. He poured liquid on merchandise .. a lot of stuff was destroyed that way.”

  • February 12, 2020: UC Santa Cruz College Republican Display Destroyed and Vandalized

A 14-year-old high school student wearing a “Make America Hat Again” hat was struck and called a “fascist” while leaving a New Hampshire polling place Tuesday night with the father of his friend, authorities said.

Windham Police Capt. Bryan Smith confirmed the details of the incident to Pluralist and said an investigation was underway but would not comment further.

  • February 13, 2020: Man Threatens to Cut Throats of Arizona State Students for Trump Event

 According to reports, the former cop, Daniel Sprague, was celebrating his 50th birthday at The Stage bar on Broadway in Nashville, Tennessee, and donned a red “Make Fifty Great Again” hat given to him by his wife.

Sprague told WSMV that people came up to him and were “just loving the little word play on the hat and taking pictures and wishing me happy birthday.” However, Sprague claims one woman approached him and ultimately punched him in the face, grabbing his hat and shouting, “How dare you.”

When a rodeo clown in Nowheresville, Nowhere, puts on an Obama mask, the media destroy his reputation and career.

When some guy makes a video mocking CNN, the Hate Network destroys his life by threatening to doxx him.

When the media want certain behavior to stop, they launch jihads.

But when Trump supporters, including children, are physically assaulted, the media shrug, and that shrug is a wink, a nod of approval, a way of saying, Carry on, we’re on your side. You heroes have nothing to fear from us.

The corporate media are a danger to every law-abiding American citizen, and their embrace of violence against us, their encouragement of that violence, will only get worse as the 2020 race heats up.

And never forget that as the media encourage this violence against us, they also seek to disarm us.

Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC. Follow his Facebook Page here.

Amy Klobuchar: ‘I Am Troubled by Having a Socialist Lead Our Ticket’


Posted by Kyle Morris | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/02/10/amy-klobuchar-i-am-troubled-by-having-a-socialist-lead-our-ticket/

WASHINGTON, DC – FEBRUARY 3: Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) speaks to members of the media at the U.S. Capitol on February 3, 2020 in Washington, DC. Closing arguments begin Monday after the Senate voted to block witnesses from appearing in the impeachment trial. The final vote is … Alex Edelman/Getty Images

Democrat presidential hopeful and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), during an interview with CBS News, said she is “troubled” by the thought that Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) could lead the Democrat Party’s ticket in November against President Donald Trump.

Klobuchar’s remarks were made during an interview with CBS News’s Ed O’Keefe on her campaign bus after an event in Keene, New Hampshire. O’Keefe pressed Klobuchar on her decision to raise her hand on the debate stage after the candidates were questioned on whether they worry about having a democratic socialist for a presidential nominee.

“The question should be why didn’t everyone else raise their hand?” Klobuchar told O’Keefe. “But they didn’t because people are looking at each other, and it may not be popular, and you’re going to anger some people, but I believe in leading and doing what you think is right, and that’s why I raised my hand because I am troubled by having a socialist lead our ticket.”

Klobuchar also said voters “are tired of the extremes in our politics and the noise and the nonsense” and claimed they want a candidate who can “bring in ideas and actually get them done.”

The Minnesota senator went on to say that it would be a “lot tougher” for freshman Democrats to keep their seats in November should Sanders be the nominee.

“The debates have been an even playing field for me,” Klobuchar told CBS News. “People can’t buy their way into being able to respond on the debate stage. They can’t have the bigger name. So, people are able to look at the candidates and think, ‘Wait a minute, who can really stand up to Donald Trump? Who has ideas that are similar to mine?’”

According to a national average from Real Clear Politics, Klobuchar sits in sixth place with 4.3 percent support from voters.

Follow Kyle on Twitter @RealKyleMorris and Facebook.

Today’s TWO Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Bernie Jobs Program

Bernie Sanders’s jobs program could look like something straight out of the Soviet Union.
Bernie Jobs ProgramPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.

Today’s THREE Politically INCORRECT Cartoons by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Deal of the Century

Trump offers Israel and Palestinians a “Deal of the century” but have the Palestinians ever said yes to peace.
Deal of Century IsraelPolitical cartoon A.F. Branco ©2020.

Joe Biden Ducks Questions About Conflict of Interest in Ukraine


Written by Joel B. Pollak | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/26/joe-biden-ducks-questions-about-conflict-of-interest-in-ukraine/

Democratic presidential candidate, former Vice President Joe Biden speaks after exiting the stage at the Iowa Federation Labor Convention on August 21, 2019 in Altoona, Iowa. Candidates had 10 minutes each to address union members during the convention. The 2020 Democratic presidential Iowa caucuses will take place on Monday, February … Joshua Lott/Getty Images

Former Vice President Joe Biden claimed in an interview set to air Sunday morning that no one had been able to point to anything he had done wrong in Ukraine.

Biden told Manchester, New Hampshire’s WMUR-9:

My case has already been made. There’s not a single solitary person in this administration who said I did anything other than my job. Not anybody in the United States of America that has been involved at all. Not anybody abroad … I did my job, and I did it really well. The problem is here, this is all about Trump’s ability to take the focus off.

Biden’s claim contradicts the testimony of several of the witnesses Democrats themselves called in the House impeachment inquiry.

George Kent, Deputy Assistant Secretary in the European and Eurasian Bureau at the State Department, told the House Intelligence Committee that Biden had an apparent conflict of interest because his son, Hunter Biden, had been appointed to a well-compensated position on the board of a Ukrainian gas company, Burisma, that was widely perceived to be corrupt.

Kent said that he brought the issue up in 2015: “I raised my concerns [with the vice president’s staff] that I had heard that Hunter Biden was on the board of a company owned by somebody that the U.S. Government had spent money trying to get tens of millions of dollars back and that could create the perception of a conflict of interest.”

He added that the vice president’s office had said that Biden was too busy dealing with the tragic death of his other son, Beau. But nothing was done afterwards, either.

Former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch told the committee that she had been specifically briefed by the Obama administration before her confirmation hearing not to answer questions about Biden’s conflict of interest, but to direct all questions to the vice president’s office, instead.

Reporters had first raised the question of Biden’s apparent conflict of interest in 2014, after Hunter Biden’s appointment, but nothing was apparently done about it.

Biden himself admitted last week that the arrangement “looked bad.”

The full interview airs Sunday morning at 10:00 a.m. on WMUR-9.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He earned an A.B. in Social Studies and Environmental Science and Public Policy from Harvard College, and a J.D. from Harvard Law School. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

Poll: 47% of Young Democrats Prefer Other Countries over America


Written by Alana Mastrangelo | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2020/01/14/poll-47-of-young-democrats-prefer-other-countries-over-america/

ORLANDO, FLORIDA – JUNE 18: An anti-Trump protester makes a sign during a protest against President Donald Trump outside a rally where Trump officially launched his re-election campaign on June 18, 2019 in Orlando, Florida. (Photo by Gerardo Mora/Getty Images) 

A shocking new poll has discovered that 47 percent of young Democrats believe that other countries are better than the United States. Moreover, many young Americans admit that they wouldn’t mind other countries becoming as militarily powerful as the United States.

Slightly more than one third — 36 percent — of Americans 18 to 29 say that other countries are better than the United States, according to a recent poll released by Pew Research.

Among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents under the age of 30, nearly half, 47 percent, say that there are other countries that are better than the U.S. Meanwhile, just 20 percent of Democrats age 50 and over agree with this sentiment.

“Democrats have become more likely to say there are other countries that are better than the U.S.,”says Pew Research. “In telephone surveys, the share of Democrats saying this is higher than at any point since the question was first asked by Pew Research Center in 2011, and there has been a corresponding decline in the share saying the U.S. stands above other nations.” This poll demonstrates the dramatic shift in the Democrat party’s base, and the potential schism between traditional Democrat voters and young and woke progressives.

The study also noted that young Americans are “more likely to say it would be acceptable if another country became as militarily powerful as the U.S.”

According to Pew Research, a majority of adults — 61 percent — say that the United States should maintain its status as a military superpower, but that more than half — 55 percent — of Democrats under the age of 30 admit that they would find it acceptable if other nations became as militarily powerful as the United States.

Among young Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, these numbers are significantly lower, as just 19 percent of adults under the age of 30 agree with their young Democrat counterparts with regards to the idea that other countries are superior to the United States.

Among Republicans ages 50 and older, only 4 percent share agree with this sentiment.

The report added that while a majority of Republicans say that the Untied States should try to maintain its status as a military superpower, 38 percent of Republicans under the age of 30 say that it would be acceptable if another country became as militarily powerful as the U.S.

You can follow Alana Mastrangelo on Twitter at @ARmastrangelo, and on Instagram.

Project Veritas: Bernie Sanders Field Organizer Suggests Gulags to Help ‘Nazified’ Trump Voters


Written by Joshua Caplan | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/01/14/project-veritas-bernie-sanders-field-organizer-suggests-gulags-to-help-nazified-trump-voters/

(INSET: Project Veritas screenshot of Sanders field organizer Kyle Jurek) DES MOINES, IA – DECEMBER 31: Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) leaves the stage after speaking at a New Year’s Eve campaign event on December 31, 2019 in Des Moines, Iowa. The focus of many democratic presidential campaigns … Stephen Maturen/Getty; Project Veritas

An undercover video published by Project Veritas on Tuesday shows a field organizer for Sen. Bernie Sanders’ 2020 campaign saying Soviet gulags were actually a positive phenomenon, suggesting that some similar program could re-educate Trump supporters and billionaires.

The video begins with a Project Veritas journalist asking an individual identified as Sanders organizer Kyle Jurek if “MAGA people” could be re-educated if Sanders wins the White House. “We gotta try,” Jurek replies. “In Nazi Germany, after the fall of the Nazi Party, there was a shit-ton of the populace that was fuck**g Nazified.”

“Germany had to spend billions of dollars re-educating their fuck**g people to not be Nazis,” he continues. “We’re probably going to have to do the same fuck**g thing here.”

“That’s kind of what all Bernie’s whole fuck**g like, ‘hey, free education for everybody’ because we’re going to have to teach you to not be a fuck**g Nazi,” he added.

In another part of the video, Jurek is seen discussing Soviet Union dictator Joseph Stalin’s use of gulags, where he claims that the CIA was overly critical of them. “People were actually paid a living wage in the gulags. They have conjugal visits in gulags. Gulags were meant for re-education,” he says.

Jurek is then seen suggesting that the most effective way to re-educate the billionaire class is to order them to “break rocks for 12 hours a day.”

“[The] greatest way to break a fuck**g billionaire of their privilege and their idea that they’re superior, go and break rocks for 12 hours a day. You’re now a working class person, and you’re going to fuck**g learn what the means, right?”

The video also shows Jurek warning that Milwaukee, host of this year’s Democratic National Convention, will “burn” if Sanders fails to win the party’s nomination. “If Bernie doesn’t get the nomination or it goes to a second round at the DNC convention, fuck**g Milwaukee will burn,” says Jurek. “It’ll start in Milwaukee and then when the police push back on that, other sites will fuck**g [explode].”

The footage concludes with Jurek issuing the chilling prediction that Milwaukee could see riots akin to the 1968 convention in Chicago, where left-wing activists engaged in violent riots in the streets. “Be ready to be in Milwaukee for the DNC convention. We’re going to make [1968] look like a fuck**g girl’s scout fuck**g cookout,” warns the Sanders field organizer. “The cops are going to be the ones fuck**g beaten in Milwaukee.”

The undercover video’s emergence comes as 2020 Democrats are slated to debate Tuesday evening — their final meeting before Iowa holds the nation’s first caucus on February 3. Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe has teased that Tuesday’s footage is one of several upcoming videos to be released as part of the group’s “Expose2020” campaign.

Democrats brace for ‘bloody’ primary season


Posted by AMIE PARNES – The Hill | December 27, 2019

URL of the original posting site: https://1776coalition.com/featured-content/democrats-brace-for-bloody-primary-season/

Democrats are bracing for a long, drawn-out primary season.

With just six weeks until the Iowa caucuses, some Democrats say they don’t expect a likely nominee to emerge anytime soon after early-voting states hold their contests. Instead, they’re preparing for a bruising four-way match-up that could drag on for months as candidates compete for the chance to challenge President Trump.

Former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) have consistently topped nationwide polls, but Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg remain key contenders who show no signs of slowing down.

“It’s going to be uglier than ugly,” one Democratic strategist said, pointing to surveys showing there is no clear winner across the first four states in the nominating process. “It’s going to be a bloody slugfest. And the thing a lot of us fear is that Trump will benefit from all of it.”

Read the full article: https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/475972-democrats-brace-for-bloody-primary-season

IG Report Reveals Steele Funneled Claims Through John McCain After FBI Dropped Him


Written by Aaron Klein | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/12/26/ig-report-reveals-steele-funneled-claims-through-john-mccain-after-fbi-dropped-him/

In this Aug. 25, 2009 file photo, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., holds a healthcare town hall meeting in Sun City, Ariz. McCain’s family says the Arizona senator has chosen to discontinue medical treatment for brain cancer. (AP Photo/Matt York) AP Photo/Matt York

Late Senator John McCain provided disgraced former FBI chief James Comey with five separate reports from Christopher Steele that the FBI didn’t previously possess related to unsubstantiated allegations of collusion between Russia and President Trump’s 2016 campaign, the Justice Department’s recent Inspector General report revealed.

There have long been questions about why it was necessary for McCain to pass Steele’s anti-Trump dossier to Comey on December 9, 2016, several weeks after the November 2016 presidential election. By then, Steele had already met numerous times with FBI agents to provide them with his controversial reports. Steele, however, was terminated as an FBI source in the fall of 2016 because he spoke to the news media.

The IG report discloses that McCain gave five new Steele reports to Comey that the FBI did not previously possess, showing that McCain served as a conduit for Steele’s information to reach the FBI even after the British ex-spy was formally cut off as an FBI source.

It is not clear whether McCain knew at the time that Steele had previously been terminated as an FBI source.

The IG report also verifies that a McCain aid obtained the Steele reports directly from Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson, meaning that when McCain transferred the anti-Trump charges to Comey he had to have known that the material originated with a firm that specializes in controversial opposition tactics. Fusion GPS was paid for its anti-Trump work by Trump’s primary political opponents, namely Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) via the Perkins Coie law firm.

States the IG report:

Several weeks later, on December 9, 2016, Senator John McCain provided Comey with a collection of 16 Steele election reports, 5 of which Steele had not given the FBI. McCain had obtained these reports from a staff member at the McCain Institute. The McCain Institute staff member had met with Steele and later acquired the reports from Simpson.

The unnamed McCain staff member is known to be David J. Kramer, who also infamously provided BuzzFeed with the Steele dossier.

BuzzFeed published Steele’s full dossier on January 10, 2017 setting off a firestorm of news media coverage about the document.

Prior to his death, McCain admitted to personally handing the dossier to Comey but he refused repeated requests for comment about whether he had a role in providing the dossier to BuzzFeed, including numerous inquiries sent to his office by this reporter.

In his book published last year, McCain maintained he had an “obligation” to pass the dossier charges against Trump to Comey and he would even do it again. “Anyone who doesn’t like it can go to hell,” McCain exclaimed.

Aaron Klein is Breitbart’s Jerusalem bureau chief and senior investigative reporter. He is a New York Times bestselling author and hosts the popular weekend talk radio program, “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio.” Follow him on Twitter @AaronKleinShow. Follow him on Facebook.

Written with research by Joshua Klein.

TWO Great Articles About a Recent CNN Pole That Backfired on the Leftist


CNN Poll: Support for Impeachment Dropping, Even Among Democrats

Written by Hannah Bleau | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/12/17/cnn-poll-shows-support-impeachment-dropping-even-among-democrats/

US President Donald Trump speaks at the White House Summit on Child Care and Paid Leave on December 12, 2019, in Washington, DC. (Photo by Brendan Smialowski / AFP) (Photo by BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images)

Support for impeaching President Trump is dropping while opposition is growing, a CNN poll released this week reveals.

A full House vote on the two approved articles of impeachment against the president, abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, is expected to take place this week. However, as recent polls have indicated, support for impeachment is dropping and opposition is growing.

A CNN poll released this week, conducted by SSRS December 12-15, among 1,005 adults, found that 45 percent support impeaching the president. That reflects a 5-point drop from November’s results, which showed support for impeachment at 50 percent.

Support for impeaching the president, even among Democrats alone, is dropping. In November, 90 percent of Democrats supported impeaching the president. The most recent results show the number falling to 77 percent — a 13-point drop in one month.

Meanwhile, opposition is growing. According to the poll, 47 percent oppose impeaching the president, reflecting a four-point jump from last month’s results, when opposition stood at 43 percent.  The poll’s margin of error is +/- 3.7 percentage points.

The results coincide with the House Judiciary Committee’s decision to advance articles of impeachment against the president. The full House is expected to vote this week. According a report from the Wall Street Journal, Democrats have enough votes to impeach, making a trial in the Senate inevitable.

WSJ reported:

By Monday afternoon, at least 18 from the 31 Democratic-held districts that Mr. Trump won in the 2016 presidential race had announced they would support the abuse-of-power and obstruction of Congress charges, according to a Wall Street Journal survey, with two saying they are opposed.
With the new announcements of support, and assuming no unexpected defections, Democrats have enough votes to impeach the president. While Americans nationally are about evenly split on whether they back impeachment, according to an average of polls by RealClearPolitics, some of the Democrats in the Trump-won districts acknowledged potential political risks.

About one-third, 32 percent, believe the partisan impeachment effort will ultimately help Trump’s reelection bid. The number is even greater among Republicans, with 54 percent indicating that impeachment will help him in the 2020 election.

An IBD/TIPP poll released Monday suggested that impeachment is already having an impact on the 2020 race, with voters shifting to the president over his potential Democrat contenders in hypothetical general election matchups.

“Yet another poll bad for House Democrats impeachment. CNN poll out today: Impeachment under water at 45-47,” Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) wrote, noting the significance of impeachment support dropping and opposition growing.

“Support for the charade falling just about everywhere,” he added:


Must Watch: CNN Host Melts-Down After Revealing Their Own Polls Data About Impeachment Support

Written by Staff Writer | December 17, 2019

Poor Jeffery Toobin, he had a rough day when the results of a CNN poll about impeachment support were announced.

As we have been reporting the support for impeachment has dropped and continues to, especially in battleground states. Look no further than CNN’s poll that showed support for impeachment has dropped dramatically in recent weeks – WITH DEMOCRATS!

According to CNN’s polling data, during Rep. Adam Schiff’s secret meetings in the bunker of the Capitol Building, Democrat support for impeachment was 90%. Once the Republicans forced House Democrats to hold public hearings support among Democrats dropped to 77% meaning in just a few week support among Democrats for impeachment dropped 13% points.

The news of this drop was just too much for CNN’s legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin and during a “New Day” segment he melted down over the polling data. Toobin exclaimed “that poll is wrong,” because well he, “said so!”

Mark Finkelstein at Newsbusters described Toobin’s meltdown the best:

Here was poor Jeffrey, in the depths of denial:

“I don’t believe that poll for one second, the 90 to 77%. I don’t believe it. It makes no sense that that number would change like that . . . David, that poll is wrong. Just because I said so, okay?”

Toobin stopped just short of stamping his feet, banging his fists, and knocking over his Lego tower.

The David in question was CNN political director David Chalian, who defended his own poll:

“I don’t know what’s not to believe. You call people on the telephone, you get their information. You pop out a survey. This is what those that we polled told us.”

If you enjoyed reading the transcript just watch below the man loses his mind, Toobin is in straight denial. 

RedState

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Democracide

Democrats from states where President Trump won are asked to fall on their swords and vote to impeach him.

Dems Fall on Impeachment SwordPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
See more Legal Insurrection Branco cartoons, click here.

A.F. Branco 13/Month 2020 Calendar here.

A.F. Branco Coffee Table Book “Make America Laugh again”

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.

Adam Schiff Gives Democrats Only 24 Hours to Sign Impeachment Report


Written by Joel B. Pollak | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/12/01/adam-schiff-gives-democrats-only-24-hours-to-read-impeachment-report/

WASHINGTON, DC – NOVEMBER 4: U.S. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) speaks to reporters following a closed-door hearing with the House Intelligence, Foreign Affairs and Oversight committees at the U.S. Capitol on November 4, 2019 in Washington, DC. On Monday, House investigators released the first transcripts from … Drew Angerer/Getty Images

House Intelligence Committee chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) is giving members of his committee just 24 hours to read and sign off on his report recommending articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump. As Breitbart News reported Friday, House Judiciary Committee chairman Rep. Jerry Nadler has previewed the report, and suggested it will include claims of “collusion” with Russia — as well as Ukraine, Russia’s enemy.

And as reported Saturday, Schiff will provide the full report to committee members on Monday, who must sign off on Tuesday in time for the first hearing in Nadler’s committee on Wednesday, which will discuss the supposed constitutional and legal basis for impeachment.

It is a foregone conclusion that Democrats will sign off on Schiff’s report. Evidence does not seem to be the top priority for Democrats: a majority favored an impeachment inquiry by August 1, eleven days before the so-called “whistleblower” sent a letter to Schiff complaining about Trump’s phone call with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky.

However, as the Washington Examiner‘s Byron York has noted, Democrats are in such a rush that they are leaving potential facts out of their examination. For example, they could wage a court battle to force former National Security Adviser John Bolton to testify. Bolton reportedly disapproved of the role played by U.S. Ambassador to the E.U. Gordon Sondland and Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani in relations with Ukraine. He could be a key witness. However, Democrats did not want to wait to hear what he had to say.

As York noted recently in a column titled “Why the rush toward impeachment?”, Democrats “are racing to get the job done by Christmas. They’re not even trying to hear from some key witnesses, like former national security adviser John Bolton, because they don’t want to take the time to go to court over it.”

York notes that Democrats are fearful of letting impeachment drag into the 2020 presidential primary, when it will pull several U.S. Senators off the campaign trail. And they are also worried about the fact that public support for impeachment is stagnant at best, and slipping at worst, after lackluster public hearings last month.

But the rush has been a feature from the very beginning. On the day that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced an impeachment inquiry, the president had already announced that he had declassified the transcript (or “readout”) of the phone call with Zelensky, and that it would be published the next day. Pelosi did not want to wait for the evidence: her decision was driven by political factors.

Likewise, the Intelligence Committee has rushed its proceedings before all of the evidence was available to most members of Congress, or the public. It often published lengthy transcripts of closed-door depositions on the eve of public hearings, and only released the most exculpatory transcript after public hearings were over.

Nadler has given Trump until Friday to respond to a request to participate, either directly or through his counsel, in the Judiciary Committee’s impeachment proceedings.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He earned an A.B. in Social Studies and Environmental Science and Public Policy from Harvard College, and a J.D. from Harvard Law School. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

Republicans to Subpoena Whistleblower, Hunter Biden, Alexandra Chalupa


Written by Kristina Wong | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/11/20/republicans-to-subpoena-whistleblower-hunter-biden-alexandra-chalupa/

WASHINGTON, DC – NOVEMBER 20: Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) listens as Gordon Sondland, the U.S ambassador to the European Union, testifies before the House Intelligence Committee in the Longworth House Office Building on Capitol Hill November 20, 2019 in Washington, DC. The committee heard testimony during the fourth day of …Alex Edelman/Getty Images

Republicans intend to subpoena testimony and documents related to the anonymous whistleblower, Hunter Biden, and Democratic National Committee contractor Alexandra Chalupa, according to a letter they sent to House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA).

“Although Speaker Pelosi promised that Democrats would ‘treat the President with fairness,’ you have repeatedly prevented Republicans from fully and fairly examining issues central to the Democrats’ ‘impeachment inquiry,’” House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Devin Nunes (R-CA) and Oversight and Reform Committee Ranking Member Jim Jordan (R-OH) wrote in a November 20, 2019, letter.

“We therefore write to inform you that we intend to subpoena testimony and records in an attempt to inject some semblance of fairness and objectivity into your one-side and partisan inquiry,” they said.

On the whistleblower, they wrote that the whistleblower’s testimony is “necessary for a full and fair understanding of all relevant facts.” They wrote:

The Inspector General of the Intelligence Community reported that the whistleblower had a political bias against President Trump and public reports suggest that the whistleblower worked closely with former Vice President Joe Biden. In addition, there are multiple discrepancies between the whistleblower’s complaint — the piece of evidence central to the Democrat’ inquiry — and the closed testimony of the witnesses. For these reasons, we must assess the whistleblower’s credibility and the sources he or she utilized to develop the anonymous complaint.

On Biden, they wrote that since witnesses raised the issue of Hunter Biden getting paid $50,000 per month for sitting on the board of a Ukrainian natural gas company that was under investigation, learning more about it would be “directly relevant to the inquiry”:

According to the New York Times, Hunter Biden was ‘part of a broad effort by Burisma to bring in well-connected Democrats during a period when the company was facing investigations backed not just by domestic Ukrainian forces but by officials in the Obama administration.’ Reports suggest that Burisma paid Hunter Biden $50,000 per month through a company called Rosemont Seneca Bohai LLC. Because witnesses explained that Hunter Biden’s presence on Burisma’s board raised concerns during the Obama Administration and President Trump briefly raised this issue during his phone call with President Zelensky, this information is directly relevant to the Democrats’ ‘impeachment inquiry.’

On Chalupa, they also wrote that her testimony would be “directly relevant” since witnesses have testified that Trump believed the Ukrainians “tried to take [him] down”:

In August 2016, less than three months before the election, Valeriy Chaly, then-Ukrainian Ambassador to the United States, authored an op-ed in a U.S. newspaper criticizing candidate Trump. In addition, in January 2017, Politico reported about Ukrainian government’s effort to ‘sabotage’ the Trump campaign in 2016 by working closely with the media and a Democratic National Committee consultant named Alexandra Chalupa. The Politico article detailed how Chalupa ‘traded information and leads’ with staff at the Ukrainian embassy and how the Ukrainian embassy ‘worked directly with reporters researching Trump, [Trump campaign manager Paul] Manafort, and Russia to point them in the right directions.’ Because witnesses testified that President Trump believed that Ukraine ‘tried to take [him] down’ in 2016, this information is directly relevant to the Democrats’ ‘impeachment inquiry.’

Nunes and Jordan concluded:

The American people see through your sham ‘impeachment inquiry.’ The American people understand how you have affirmatively prevented Republicans from examining serious issues directly relevant to the issues. Therefore, to provide some basic level of fairness and objectivity to your ‘impeachment inquiry,’ we intend to subpoena the anonymous whistleblower and Hunter Biden for sworn testimony in closed-door depositions. We also intend to subpoena the following entities for record relevant to the Democrats’ ‘impeachment inquiry’:
    1. The whistleblower for documents and communications relating to the drafting and filing of the complaint dated August 12, 2019, and the personal memorandum drafted on or around July 26, 2019.
    2. Rosemont Seneca Bohai LLC and any subsidiaries or affiliates for records relating to Hunter Biden’s position on the Board of Directors of Burisma Holdings; and
    3. The Democratic National Committee for communications with Ukrainian government officials and for records relating to Alexandra Chalupa.
“We look forward to your prompt concurrence. Your failure to concur with all of these subpoenas shall constitute evidence of your denial of fundamental fairness and due process,” they wrote.

Follow Breitbart News’s @Kristina_Wong.

Emails: Open Society Kept Alleged ‘Whistleblower’ Eric Ciaramella Updated on George Soros’s Personal Ukraine Activities


Written by Aaron Klein | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/11/17/emails-open-society-kept-alleged-whistleblower-eric-ciaramella-updated-on-george-soross-personal-ukraine-activities/

George Soros, Chairman, Soros Fund Management and Open Society, testifies before US Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry on ‘Foreign Policy and the Global Economic Crisis’ March 25, 2009, on Capitol Hill, in Washington, DC. AFP Photo/Paul J. Richards (Photo credit should read PAUL J. RICHARDS/AFP/Getty Images)

Eric Ciaramella, whom Real Clear Investigations suggests is the likely so-called whistleblower, received emails about Ukraine policy from a top director at George Soros’s Open Society Foundations.

The emails informed Ciaramella and a handful of other Obama administration foreign policy officials about Soros’s whereabouts, the contents of Soros’s private meetings about Ukraine and a future meeting the billionaire activist was holding with the prime minister of Ukraine.

A primary recipient of the Open Society emails along with Ciaramella was then-Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland, who played a central role in the anti-Trump dossier affair. Nuland, with whom Ciaramella worked closely, received updates on Ukraine issues from dossier author Christopher Steele in addition to her direct role in facilitating the dossier within the Obama administration.

The emails spotlight Soros’s access to national security officials under the Obama administration on the matter of Ukraine. In one instance, Jeff Goldstein, senior policy analyst for Eurasia at the Open Society Foundations, sent a June 9, 2016 email to Nuland and Ciaramella, who were the missive’s primary recipients.

CC’d were three other State Department officials involved in European affairs, including Alexander Kasanof who worked at the U.S. embassy in Kiev.

The message read:

I wanted to let you know that Mr. Soros met with Johannes Hahn in Brussels earlier today. One of the issues he raised was concern over the decision to delay the visa liberalization for Georgia and the implications for Ukraine.

The email revealed that “GS” – meaning Soros – “is also meeting [Georgian] President [Giorgi] Margvelashvili today and speaking with PM Groyman,” referring to Ukrainian Prime Minister Volodymyr Groysman.

The email stated that Soros told Hahn “that Ukrainian civil society is concerned that without reciprocity from the EU for steps Ukraine has taken to put in place sensitive anti-corruption and anti-discrimination legislation and institutions it will not be possible to continue to use the leverage of EU instruments and policies to maintain pressure for reforms in the future.”

Soros also “urged Hahn to advocate with member states to move ahead with visa liberalization for Ukraine,” the email related.

“I’m sure you’ve been working this issue hard; if you have any thoughts on how this is likely to play out or where particular problems lie I’d appreciate if you could let us know,” the email concluded.

Goldstein’s email text sent to Nuland and Ciaramella was not addressed to any one individual. Nuland replied that she would be happy to discuss the issues by phone. Goldstein set up a phone call and wrote that Soros specifically asked that an employee from the billionaire’s “personal office” join the call with Nuland.

The email was released last August as part of a separate Freedom of Information Act request by the conservative group Citizens United.  The FOIA request was unrelated to Ciaramella.

Johannes Hahn, referenced in the emails as meeting with Soros about Ukraine, is the European Commissioner for Neighborhood Policy and Enlargement Negotiations. In 2015, Hahn participated with Nuland in the YES Summit, which bills itself as “the leading public diplomacy platform in Eastern Europe.” Another summit participant was Vadym Pozharskyi, a board advisor to Burisma, the Ukranian natural gas company at the center of the impeachment trial and the allegations related to Hunter and Joe Biden.

On scores of occasions, Hahn was a featured speaker at roundtables and other events produced by the Atlantic Council think tank, which is funded by and works in partnership with Burisma. The Atlantic Council is also financed by Soros’s Open Society Foundations and has been in the news for ties to various actors associated with the impeachment issue.

In one of several instances, Breitbart News reported, itinerary for a trip to Ukraine in August organized by the Atlantic Council reveals that a staffer on Rep. Adam Schiff’s House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence held a meeting during the trip with Acting U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Bill Taylor, now a key witness for Democrats pursuing impeachment. The Schiff staffer is also an Atlantic Council fellow, while Taylor has evidenced a close relationship with the Atlantic Council.

Breitbart News previously reported on other emails that show Ciaramella worked closely with Nuland. Nuland has come under repeated fire for her various roles in the anti-Trump dossier controversy.

In their book, Russian Roulette: The Inside Story of Putin’s War on America and the Election of Donald Trump, authors and reporters Michael Isikoff and David Corn write that Nuland gave the green light for the FBI to first meet with Steele regarding his dossier’s claims. It was at that meeting that Steele initially reported his dossier charges to the FBI, the book relates.

FBI notes cite career Justice Department official Bruce Ohr as saying that Nuland was in touch with Fusion GPS co-founder and dossier producer Glenn Simpson.

Sen. John McCain, who infamously delivered the dossier to then-FBI Director James Comey, reportedly first dispatched an aide, David J. Kramer, to inquire with Nuland about the dossier claims.

Meanwhile, looped into some other email chains with Ciaramella was then-Secretary of State John Kerry’s chief of staff at the State Department, John Finer.

An extensive New Yorker profile of Steele named Finer as obtaining the contents of a two-page summary of the dossier and eventually deciding to share the questionable document with Kerry. Finer reportedly received the dossier summary from Jonathan M. Winer, the Obama State Department official who acknowledged regularly interfacing and exchanging information with Steele, according to the report. Winer previously conceded that he shared the dossier summary with Nuland.

After his name surfaced in news media reports related to probes by House Republicans into the dossier, Winer authored a Washington Post oped in which he conceded that while he was working at the State Department he exchanged documents and information with Steele. Winer further acknowledged that while at the State Department, he shared anti-Trump material with Steele passed to him by longtime Clinton confidant Sidney Blumenthal, whom Winer described as an “old friend.” Winer wrote that the material from Blumenthal – which Winer in turn gave to Steele – originated with Cody Shearer, who is a controversial figure long tied to various Clinton scandals.

In testimony last year, Nuland made statements about a meeting at the State Department in October 2016 between State officials and Steele, but said that she didn’t participate.

At a June 2018 hearing, Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC) revealed contents of the State Department’s visitor logs while he was grilling Nuland. At the hearing, Burr asked: “I know you talked extensively with our staff relative to Mr. Steele. Based upon our review of the visitor logs of the State Department, Mr. Steele visited the State Department briefing officials on the dossier in October of 2016. Did you have any role in that briefing?”

“I did not,” Nuland replied. “I actively chose not to be part of that briefing.”

“But were you aware of that briefing?” Burr asked.

“I was not aware of it until afterwards,” Nuland retorted.

Nuland did not explain how she can actively chose not to be part of Steele’s briefing, as she claimed, yet say she was unaware of the briefing until after it occurred. Nuland was not asked about the discrepancy during the public section of the testimony, which was reviewed in full by Breitbart News.

Nuland previously served as chief of staff to Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott under Bill Clinton’s administration, and then served as deputy director for former Soviet Union affairs.

Nuland faced confirmation questions prior to her most recent appointment as assistant secretary of state over her reported role in revising controversial Obama administration talking points about the 2012 Benghazi terrorist attacks. Her reported changes sought to protect Hillary Clinton’s State Department from accusations that it failed to adequately secure the woefully unprotected U.S. Special Mission in Benghazi.

Likely ‘whistleblower’

A RealClearInvestigations report by investigative journalist and author Paul Sperry named Ciaramella as best fitting the description of the so-called whistleblower.

Officials with direct knowledge of the proceedings say Ciaramella’s name has been raised in private in impeachment depositions and during at least one House open hearing that was not part of the formal impeachment proceedings.

Federal documents show Ciaramella also worked closely with Joe Biden and worked under Susan Rice, President Obama’s national security adviser. He also worked with former CIA Director John Brennan, an anti-Trump advocate who has faced controversy for his role in fueling the questionable Russia collusion investigation.  Rice participated in Russia collusion probe meetings and reportedly unmasked senior members of Trump’s presidential campaign.

Sperry cites former White House officials saying Ciaramella worked for Biden on Ukrainian policy issues in 2015 and 2016, encompassing the time period for which Biden has been facing possible conflict questions for leading Ukraine policy in light of Hunter Biden’s work for Burisma.

Mark Zaid and Andrew Bakaj, the activist attorneys representing the so-called whistleblower, refused to confirm on deny that their secretive client is indeed Ciaramella.

“We neither confirm nor deny the identity of the Intelligence Community Whistleblower,” the lawyers told the Washington Examiner in response to an inquiry about Ciaramella.

Zaid and Bakaj added, “Our client is legally entitled to anonymity. Disclosure of the name of any person who may be suspected to be the whistleblower places that individual and their family in great physical danger. Any physical harm the individual and/or their family suffers as a result of disclosure means that the individuals and publications reporting such names will be personally liable for that harm. Such behavior is at the pinnacle of irresponsibility and is intentionally reckless.”

Soros funding and ‘whistleblower’ complaint

Besides Burisma funding, the Atlantic Council is also financed by Soros’s Open Society Foundations, Google, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Inc., and the U.S. State Department. Google, Soros’s Open Society Foundations, the Rockefeller Fund, and an agency of the State Department each also finance a self-described investigative journalism organization repeatedly referenced as a source of information in the so-called whistleblower’s complaint alleging Trump was “using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country” in the 2020 presidential race.

The charges in the July 22 report referenced in the so-called whistleblower’s document and released by the Google and Soros-funded organization, the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), seem to be the public precursors for a lot of the so-called whistleblower’s own claims, as Breitbart News documented.

One key section of the so-called whistleblower’s document claims that “multiple U.S. officials told me that Mr. Giuliani had reportedly privately reached out to a variety of other Zelensky advisers, including Chief of Staff Andriy Bohdan and Acting Chairman of the Security Service of Ukraine Ivan Bakanov.”

This was allegedly to follow up on Trump’s call with Zelensky in order to discuss the “cases” mentioned in that call, according to the so-called whistleblower’s narrative. The complainer was clearly referencing Trump’s request for Ukraine to investigate the Biden corruption allegations.

Even though the statement was written in first person – “multiple U.S. officials told me” – it contains a footnote referencing a report by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP).

That footnote reads:

In a report published by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) on 22 July, two associates of Mr. Giuliani reportedly traveled to Kyiv in May 2019 and met with Mr. Bakanov and another close Zelensky adviser, Mr. Serhiy Shefir.

The so-called whistleblower’s account goes on to rely upon that same OCCRP report on three more occasions. It does so to:

  • Write that Ukraine’s Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko “also stated that he wished to communicate directly with Attorney General Barr on these matters.”
  • Document that Trump adviser Rudy Giuliani “had spoken in late 2018 to former Prosecutor General Shokin, in a Skype call arranged by two associates of Mr. Giuliani.”
  • Bolster the charge that, “I also learned from a U.S. official that ‘associates’ of Mr. Giuliani were trying to make contact with the incoming Zelenskyy team.” The so-called whistleblower then relates in another footnote, “I do not know whether these associates of Mr. Giuliani were the same individuals named in the 22 July report by OCCRP, referenced above.”

The OCCRP report repeatedly referenced is actually a “joint investigation by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) and BuzzFeed News, based on interviews and court and business records in the United States and Ukraine.”

BuzzFeed infamously also first published the full anti-Trump dossier alleging unsubstantiated collusion between Trump’s presidential campaign and Russia. The dossier was paid for by Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee, and was produced by the Fusion GPS opposition dirt outfit.

The OCCRP and BuzzFeed “joint investigation” resulted in both OCCRP and BuzzFeed publishing similar lengthy pieces on July 22 claiming that Giuliani was attempting to use connections to have Ukraine investigate Trump’s political rivals. The so-called whistleblower’s document, however, only mentions the largely unknown OCCRP and does not reference BuzzFeed, which has faced scrutiny over its reporting on the Russia collusion claims.

Aaron Klein is Breitbart’s Jerusalem bureau chief and senior investigative reporter. He is a New York Times bestselling author and hosts the popular weekend talk radio program, “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio.” Follow him on Twitter @AaronKleinShow. Follow him on Facebook.

Joshua Klein contributed research to this article.

Fact Check: No, Gordon Sondland Did Not Prove Ukraine ‘Quid pro Quo’


Reported by Joel B. Pollak | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/11/05/fact-check-no-gordon-sondland-did-not-prove-ukraine-quid-pro-quo/

Gordon Sondland, the United States Ambassador to the European Union, adresses the media during a press conference at the US Embassy to Romania in Bucharest September 5, 2019. (Photo by Daniel MIHAILESCU / AFP) (Photo credit should read DANIEL MIHAILESCU/AFP/Getty Images)

CLAIM: Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland confirmed, contrary to earlier testimony, that there had been a “quid pro quo” between President Donald Trump and the Ukrainian government: military aid for “dirt.”

VERDICT: FALSE. Sondland said that he “presumed” there was a “quid pro quo.” But he did not have any first-hand knowledge of one, and other witnesses have testified that there was no such “quid pro quo” at all.

The House Intelligence Committee began releasing transcripts this week of its behind-closed-doors interviews with witnesses in the “impeachment inquiry.” On Tuesday, it released the transcripts of the appearances of Sondland and former Special Representative for Ukraine Kurt Volker.

Volker testified that there had never been a “quid pro quo” — that he had never heard one discussed, and that Ukrainian officials seemed unaware of any such arrangement at all.

But Sondland, who had also testified earlier that there was no “quid pro quo,” had to amend that testimony after he was apparently contradicted by U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Bill Taylor, who testified last month that he believed there was a “quid pro quo,” under which the Trump administration was withholding key military aid to Ukraine unless it investigated alleged corruption related to former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden.

In a supplemental declaration filed with the committee, Sondland said that “by the beginning of September 2019, and in the absence of any credible explanation for the suspension of aid,” he “presumed that the [Ukraine] aid suspension had become linked to the proposed anti-corruption statement” and the investigation of the Bidens. That led him to tell the Ukrainian government that “resumption of U.S. aid would likely not occur” until it complied.

But there are two big logical leaps in Sondland’s statement.

The first is that he only “presumed” there was a “quid pro quo” — that is, he did not have direct knowledge of one.

The second is that he told the Ukrainians that a “quid pro quo” was “likely” — that is, he did not know with certainty.

In their rush to accuse the Trump administration of wrongdoing, Democrats and the media have overlooked one other key fact: the crucial August 2019 Politico article.

The article, “Trump holds up Ukraine military aid meant to confront Russia,” dated August 28, was the first that the Ukrainians ever knew about any withholding of aid — five weeks after the phone call between Trump and Ukraine president Volodymyr Zelensky which supposedly prompted the so-called “whistleblower” to approach Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and the Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee. Sondland refers specifically to September.

Therefore what changed his — and others’ — impression was not anything the administration (or its representatives) did or said. Rather, it was the media.

Since Sondland consumes the same media that everyone else does — indeed, it is part of a diplomat’s job to know what is being said — he drew his own conclusions. But when he asked President Trump directly, Trump told him there was no “quid pro quo”: he just wanted Zelensky to do “the right thing.”

All of this presumes there is something wrong with a “quid pro quo.” But even that seems untrue. In fact, “quid pro quo” arrangements are normal in diplomacy. A House bill passed recently by Democrats would establish a “quid pro quo” that bars Russia from access even to private U.S. funds until it can be shown not to have interfered in U.S. elections. Trump, Democrats say, sought his personal or political interest; it also happened to be a national interest.

For years, Democrats defended the investigations of President Barack Obama’s administration into then-candidate Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign by arguing that the country had to know if a major candidate was corrupt or compromised by a foreign power.

That investigation may have been conducted in an unlawful manner — and a grand jury is now on the case — but the logic they used then is even more appropriate to Ukraine and the Bidens.

Hunter Biden’s role as a go-between for Burisma — a Ukrainian gas company suspected of corruption — and his father’s administration has never been fully investigated. The so-called “whistleblower” worked for Biden at the time; that conflict of interest, too, has never been explored.

If Trump had demanded a “quid pro quo,” he would have been doing his job. As it is, there is no evidence of a “quid pro quo” — certainly not from Gordon Sondland.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He earned an A.B. in Social Studies and Environmental Science and Public Policy from Harvard College, and a J.D. from Harvard Law School. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

Adam Schiff and the Chamber of Secrets: Inside the Impeachment Dungeon


Authored by Kristina Wong | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/10/24/adam-schiff-and-the-chamber-of-secrets-inside-the-impeachment-dungeon/

WASHINGTON, DC – OCTOBER 15: (L-R) Representative Mark Meadows (R-NC) and Representative Adam Schiff (D-CA), Chairman of the House Select Committee on Intelligence Committee returns to a closed session before the House Intelligence, Foreign Affairs and Oversight committees October 15, 2019 at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC. Kent was …Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images

Talk of the impeachment inquiry is everywhere in America, but Americans have no idea what it actually looks like.

That’s because House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) has so far conducted the entire impeachment inquiry in a secret room in the basement of the Capitol building that is not accessible by the general public.

Just to the south of the Capitol Visitor Center underneath the dome and down one spiral staircase is a room hidden behind two heavy wooden doors. On the doors are red signs with white letters that say: “Restricted Area. No public or media access. Cameras and recording devices prohibited without proper authorization.” Behind those doors is a hallway, which leads to the secret room where Schiff is conducting the impeachment inquiry of President Trump.

The House Intelligence Committee has a huge hearing room in the Longworth House Office Building where they can hold hearings that do not concern classified material, which members of the public and journalists can attend. But the impeachment inquiry is taking place in the committee’s Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) — a room for members to use when discussing and viewing classified material.

Republicans say the impeachment inquiry is not an intelligence matter that needs to be in the SCIF, but its location gives Schiff the ability to tightly control everything — and everyone — going in and out.

Security guards stand in front of the two wooden doors to make sure reporters and other unauthorized members of the public stay out. But inside the hallway, there are security officers who make sure unauthorized members of Congress and staffers stay out of the SCIF. Schiff and the Democrats control who is allowed in.

“You can’t go in unless you’re on the list,” a congressional source with knowledge of the impeachment inquiry told Breitbart News. “[They] have like a list, so you can’t sneak into the SCIF or try to get an extra staffer in there or something like that.”

Under Schiff’s rules for the impeachment inquiry, only members of the three committees involved in the inquiry — House Intelligence, Foreign Affairs, and Oversight and Government Reform Committees — are allowed in. The House Intelligence Committee can have as many staffers as they want in the SCIF, but the other two committees can only have two staffers each.

The SCIF is a small windowless room that has a long rectangular table in the middle, sources said. Democrats sit on one side, Republicans sit on the other, and the witness sits at the head of the table.

Although the room is intended to seat 30 to 40 people, during the recent deposition of Amb. Gordon Sondland there were as many as 70 to 80 people crammed inside, forcing lawmakers to stand and sit on the floor, according to a Republican source on a committee involved in impeachment. With so many bodies packed in there, it quickly got too hot, requiring the blasting of air conditioning, which then made it too cold, the source said.

Having so many people inside the room and dozens of reporters loitering outside is a security hazard and potentially a fire hazard, the Republican source said.

“The SCIF is supposed to be a secure location for safe-holding of classified information, but there are real concerns about having so many people wandering around,” said the source.

The depositions typically start with opening statements, then Democrats have about an hour to ask the witness questions, and then Republicans have about an hour. There is usually a break before Democrats begin another round of questioning, and then Republicans, and so on, until there are no more questions left. The recent depositions have lasted as many as ten hours.

Inside that secret room, Schiff has lorded his power over the process, Republicans say.

“He will remind you early and often that he is in charge,” said Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-NY), who has attended every deposition and transcribed interview.

“Schiff likes to interject himself during the Republican questioning and we always have to point out to him we obviously don’t do the same thing during their questioning, but he just can’t help himself,” he said.

Since the House has not formally voted on beginning an impeachment inquiry — which would give Republicans certain rights and the Trump administration due process, Republicans are not able to subpoena witnesses and the White House is not able to have a counsel present. Zeldin said Schiff is taking full advantage of that and forcing witnesses to answer questions they are not sure they can answer.

“He’ll tell the witness to speak even if the witness isn’t sure and there may be an outstanding question about executive privilege or something else,” he said.

“So inside the super secret bunker of the Capitol, the basement where the impeachment inquiry charade depositions are taking place, he is the grand jury, the judge, and the prosecutor,” he said.

Zeldin said Democrats have been petty about sharing materials as well.

“If a person asks for an additional copy of the exhibit, the sick smile that will be on some people’s faces as if somehow being in the majority means that we should make a petty moment of what might be a genuine ask,” he said.

Republicans say Democrats are keeping transcripts from members of Congress who will ultimately vote on any articles of impeachment, and even from Republican members involved in the inquiry.

House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Devin Nunes said Republican members involved in the inquiry cannot even view transcripts without having “minders” looking over their shoulder. “That is unprecedented,” Nunes told Fox News on Wednesday. Staffers of the committees say the environment inside and outside the SCIF is tense.

“It is so, so tense. I mean, it is like what you see in movies tense. It’s weird,” said the congressional source.

“It is just crazy. No one talking to anybody. Everyone being real quiet, because you just don’t know who’s standing around you,” the source said. “You’re dealing with three committees and you don’t know who everyone is.”

Republicans say the depositions and interviews are unclassified and there is no need for them to take place behind closed doors.

Schiff has defended the secrecy of the hearings by comparing it to a “grand jury,” claiming he does not want potential witnesses to be able to compare stories. But Republicans argue that his claim is undercut by the numerous leaks from Democrats to reporters about what is being said during the closed-door interviews, despite House ethics rules gagging both sides.

“Unfortunately, this process of cherry-picking leaks withholding key facts and outright lying is a formula of Adam Schiff that many in the media are playing along with, and many people who were part of the enraged liberal activist base eat up,” Zeldin said.
“This whole project, is Schiff’s desire to write the world’s worst parody to take down a sitting president,” he said, referring to Schiff reading a fake conversation between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky during a hearing and later justifying it as a “parody.”

Republicans suspect that Democrats instructed the “whistleblower” to file his complaint with the intelligence community inspector general instead of the State or Justice Department inspector general so that the matter could be handled by Schiff behind closed doors.

“It’s all about shaping the narrative,” the Republican source said. “There’s a whole leaking apparatus in place.”

The source characterized that apparatus as the same as during the FBI’s collusion investigation — selective leaks to reporters that are then blown out of context with no countervailing narrative. 

More than two dozen House Republicans led by Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) stormed the SCIF on Wednesday morning, demanding access to an impeachment inquiry that could reverse the 2016 election.

“So far, Adam Schiff’s impeachment inquiry has been marked by secret interviews, selective leaks, weird theatrical performances of transcripts that never happened, and lies about contacts with the whistleblower,” Gaetz said at a press conference before the storming.
“We’re going to try to go in there and we’re going to try to figure out what’s going on, on behalf of the millions of Americans that we represent that want to see this Congress working for them, and not obsessed with attacking a president who we believe has not done anything wrong,” he said.
House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) added, “Adam Schiff is trying to impeach a president of the United States behind closed doors, literally trying to overturn the results of the 2016 election a year before Americans get to go to the polls and decide who’s going to be the president.”
“The American people deserve better, we will demand better,” Scalise said.
“This is being held behind closed doors for a reason — because they don’t want you to see what the witnesses are like,” said House Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Biggs (R-AZ), citing former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s faltering testimony.
“This is a Soviet-style impeachment process, this is closed doors, it is unfair in every way,” Biggs added. “We’re going to go in there and demand we get our rights as members of Congress.”

House Democrats have suggested that they would open the hearings up to the public, but have not stated exactly when.

“That’s obviously a step after this. But right now we’re concentrating on getting as many people as we can,” said House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Eliot Engel (D-NY) said, according to the Hill.

The pace is already beginning to take a toll on staffers and even reporters, sources said.

“This is a marathon. And we’re on mile nine and we’re severely out of shape. Even the reporters who are there, they’re tired, everyone’s kind of gassed,”the congressional source said.

“This is the long slog with not a lot of certainty on when it’s going to end. We’ve been flying through people. They supposedly want to get it done between Christmas and Thanksgiving. There are staffers who have worked for 20 days. They have not taken a single day off and work from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m.,” the source said.

Nolte: ABC Fails to Fact-Check Hunter Biden’s Claim of ‘Not One Cent’ from Chinese Govt. Deal


Written by John Nolte | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2019/10/15/nolte-abc-fails-to-fact-check-hunter-bidens-claim-of-not-one-cent-from-chinese-govt-deal/

Hunter-Biden-interview-5577c-abc-ps-191014_hpMain | ABC News

ABC News allowed Hunter Biden to get away with the claim he did not make “one cent” from his company’s mega-deal with a Chinese bank that is a subsidiary of the Chinese government — when its own past reporting has said just the opposite.

During the sit-down interview, ABC’s Amy Robach set up the segment about Hunter’s China deal with the background on President Trump’s desire to look into Hunter’s shady $1.5 billion — with a “B” — deal with the Chinese bank (starts at around 5:03)::

ROBACH: Also on Trump’s list of accusations against Hunter Biden: that Hunter flew on Air Force Two with his father during an official government trip to China in 2013, leveraging that connection for financial gain in an investment deal with Chinese businessman Jonathan Li.

What Robach’s question omitted is that the deal was not just with an individual businessman but with the Bank of China — a subsidiary of the Chinese government itself.

She then asks Hunter directly:

ROBACH: The president has repeatedly said you have received $1.5 billion, despite no experience and for no apparent reason. Obviously fact checkers have said that that is not true.

HUNTER: This literally has no basis in fact in any way.

ROBACH: Have you received any money from that business dealing?

HUNTER: No.

ROBACH: At all?

HUNTER: Not one cent.

ROBACH: Definitely not 1.5 billion.

HUNTER: It’s crazy. They feel as though they have the license to go out and say whatever they want.

Hunter is then allowed to trash Trump and his family as liars while Robach, who has just lauded fact checkers and their fact checking,  says nothing about the fact that — and this is important — according to her own network’s reporting,  and Hunter’s own attorney, Hunter has a ten percent stake in BHR, the company that made that mammoth $1.5 billion China deal.

Just a few months ago, ABC aired an in-depth report on Hunter’s shady business dealings that included this nugget (starts at about the 2:00 minute mark):

This video shows Chinese diplomats greeting Vice President Biden as he arrives in Beijing in December of 2013. Right by his side? His son Hunter. Less than two weeks later, Hunter’s firm had new business, creating an investment fund in China, involving the government controlled Bank of China, with reports they hopes to raise $1.5 billion. Hunter still plays a role in the fund. His lawyer says his stake is worth about half a million dollars.

Where was Robach’s followup question? Where was her oh-so-vital fact checking? Why did she let him get away with saying “not one cent” when her own network reported just a few months ago that he had equity in the firm that made a massive $1.5 billion deal?

Obviously, Hunter is playing a semantic game with that “not one cent” comment. Hunter’s attorney appears to do the same in a statement he released just two days ago, on October 13, 2019:

Hunter neither played a role in the formation or licensure of the company, nor owned any equity in it while his father was Vice President. He served only as a member of its board of directors, which he joined based on his interest in seeking ways to bring Chinese capital to international markets. It was an unpaid position.

To date, Hunter has not received any compensation for being on BHR’s board of directors. He has not received any return on his investment; there have been no distributions to BHR shareholders since Hunter obtained his equity interest.

So Hunter hasn’t “received” “one cent” because there has been no payout to investors. There was no direct commission for that deal, which dum-dums would obviously suspect like he’s a bottom-run sales rep. But here’s the rub, according to no less than FactCheck.org: Hunter might not have been paid “one cent” yet, but he is still could be looking at an eventual payoff that hits the $20 million mark:

[Hunter’s lawyer George] Mesires told the New York Times that while Hunter Biden now has a 10% stake in BHR, which he acquired through a company he created named Skaneateles LLC, “there have been no distributions to the shareholders since Hunter has been an equity owner.”

But that doesn’t mean Biden won’t eventually make millions from the deal. Steven Kaplan, who conducts research on issues in private equity, venture capital, entrepreneurial finance, corporate governance and corporate finance at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, told us that a private equity fund with $2 billion under management will typically generate fees over its life of hundreds of millions of dollars.

“It is difficult to imagine, if not incomprehensible, that a 10% stake in those economics is worth only $420K,” Kaplan told us via email. “The distinction they appear to be making is they capitalized the management company with $4.2 M even if the fund manages $2 B.  The value of that management company is likely far in excess of $4.2 M if they are managing $2 B.”

Kaplan pointed to two large publicly traded private equity firms for reference, both of which have a market value of about 10% of the assets under their management. Using that as a rough guide, that would put the value of Hunter Biden’s share closer to $20 million, he said.

Basically, it looks as though Hunter claiming not have made one cent off the China deal is like a CEO claiming he was not paid one cent to run a company because his compensation came from stocks or bars of gold or pearls or the gift of a home. But the fact is this: any deal that increases the value of the company that Hunter Biden has a stake in — and a $1.5 billion deal with a bank owned by one of the world’s biggest economies does just that — is a deal where Hunter Biden has a financial interest.

Maybe ABC will reveal Hunter’s semantic dishonesty when the rest of the interview airs later tonight. Maybe Robach will ask him what he has “earned” or “gained” as a result of the deal, rather than “received.” If not, it is a gross dereliction of duty on the network’s part. And all of this comes just one day after ABC was caught presenting 2014 video from a Kentucky gun range as video of  Turkish military operation against the Kurds.

Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC. Follow his Facebook Page here.

Amazon Moves into the Business of Elections


Written by Lucas Nolan | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/10/15/amazon-moves-into-the-business-of-elections/

Jeff Bezos arrive at the Vanity Fair Oscar Party on Sunday, March 4, 2018, in Beverly Hills, Calif. (Photo by Evan Agostini/Invision/AP)

Amazon is reportedly making an aggressive push into the business side of state and local elections. Since the 2016 election, more than 40 states are using one or more of Amazon’s services for elections.

Reuters reports that tech giant Amazon has begun aggressively expanding its Web Services division into the world of election technology and has been quietly doing so since the 2016 U.S. presidential election. More than 40 states are now using one or more of Amazon’s election offerings according to a recent presentation given by an Amazon executive this year which was seen by Reuters.

Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden and the U.S. federal body that administers and enforces campaign finance laws also reportedly use Amazon’s election products. While Amazon does not handle voting on election days, Amazon Web Services (AWS) is running state and county election websites, storing voter registration rolls and ballot data, and helping overseas servicemembers to participate in voting.

Amazon describes its services to prospective clients telling them that they are a low-cost provider of secure election technology, a key selling point as many officials aim to avoid a repeat of the 2016 elections when allegations of poor cybersecurity were made against multiple government bodies.

Michael Jackson, leader of Public Health & U.S. Elections at AWS, told prospective government clients during a webinar presentation in February: “The fact that we have invested heavily in this area, it helps to attest to the fact that in over 40 states, the Amazon cloud is being trusted to power in some way, some aspect of elections.”

Many welcome Amazon’s push into the election market, David O’Berry, co-founder of Precog Security, said that moving to AWS is “a good option for campaigns, who do not have the resources to protect themselves.” But others have warned that Amazon could become a bigger target for hackers.

Chris Vickery, director of cyber risk research at cybersecurity startup Upguard, stated: “It makes Amazon a bigger target” for hackers, “and also increases the challenge of dealing with an insider attack.”

Amazon believes that its systems are reliable with a spokesperson telling Reuters: “Over time, states, counties, cities, and countries will leverage AWS services to ensure modernization of their elections for increased security, reliability, and analytics for an efficient and more effective use of taxpayer dollars.”

Ron Morgan, the chief deputy county clerk of Travis County in Texas which uses Amazon’s servers to run its election website stated: “We think (AWS) provides us with the best available level of security.” Morgan added: “Is it bullet proof? I don’t know. But is it a very, very hard target? Absolutely.”

Read more at Reuters here.

Lucas Nolan is a reporter for Breitbart News covering issues of free speech and online censorship. Follow him on Twitter @LucasNolan or email him at lnolan@breitbart.com

Rasmussen Poll: Donald Trump Approval Rating Jumps to 53 Percent; Highest in Five Months


Reported by Charlie Spiering | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/09/24/rasmussen-poll-donald-trump-approval-rating-jumps-to-53-percent-highest-in-five-months/

P

resident Donald Trump smiles during a Cabinet meeting in the Cabinet Room of the White House, Tuesday, July 16, 2019, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

President Donald Trump received an approval rating of 53 percent from likely voters, according to a Rasmussen poll released Tuesday.

The latest poll reflects the highest approval rating for the president in five months, as the last time Trump got a 53 percent approval rating was in April 2019. 

Forty-five percent of likely voters disapproved of his performance as president.

The president’s approval rating dipped as low as 44 percent in late August but has steadily risen in September — a nine-point jump in 35 days.

Trump received a string of 53 percent approval ratings in February 2017 after he was inaugurated.

Rasmussen tracks daily results via 500 likely voters per night from telephone surveys as well as an online survey tool. The margin of sampling error for the full sample of 1,500 likely voters is +/- 2.5 percentage points.

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – A Safe Bet

Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, the other Democrat presidential candidates are trying to out “free stuff” each other and taxpayer’s expense.
Democrats Gambling with Our MoneyPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
Pete Buttigieg flies around in his private jet while telling you to stop driving your SUVs. Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.

More A.F. Branco cartoons at Flag And Cross.com here.

An adult children’s Book for all ages APOCALI NOW! brilliantly lampoons the left. ORDER >  HERE

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, the great El Rushbo, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.

Bokhari: If Democrats Cared About the Environment, They’d Talk About China


Reported by Allum Bokhari | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/09/06/bokhari-if-democrats-cared-about-the-environment-theyd-address-china/

Pedestrians wearing face masks walk on a footbridge in heavy smog in Handan city, north China’s Hebei province, 2 January 2017. Heavy smog in northern China caused hundreds of flights to be canceled and highways to shut on Sunday (1 January 2017), disrupting the first day of the New Year … Imaginechina via AP Images

Am I just seeing things? Or are all the “climate crisis solutions” proposed by the Democrats designed to cause maximum pain to ordinary people, and almost none to wealthy elites? Progressives almost seem to take joy in inconveniencing the masses for no reason. Take the plastic straw ban, for example. Even National Geographic — hardly an anti-environmentalist publication  admits that plastic straws comprise just 0.025 percent of the plastic in the oceans.

Contrast the minimal impact of plastic straws with the extraordinary impact of China, and, by extension, global free trade. China, alone, produces around a third of the ocean’s plastic waste. China’s CO2 emissions are greater than the U.S. and Europe combined, and keep going up.

If Democrats really believe that climate change is an existential threat to humanity, why are they proposing draconian and pointless curbs on the behavior of ordinary Americans? Why aren’t they going after multinationals that continue to do business with the world’s biggest polluter, without demanding any environmental commitments from them (and hey, maybe some human rights commitments too?).

You’d think Bernie, at least, would get this. But his big idea is to make everyone have fewer babies. Instead of tackling China, he’s proposing a distinctly Chinese policy. Just because he didn’t say “one-child policy” doesn’t mean the similarity isn’t there.

The real reason Democrats won’t go after China is that they are now the party of global elites, and global elites are constantly salivating about the profits that can be made from China’s market of 1.4 billion people. They look to Europe and America and see a dwindling middle class with a declining population. There’s no money in that, not long-term anyway. Maybe the problem could be fixed with pro-natal policies like Hungary’s, but why bother? It’s far easier to simply go overseas, to a country that does have a booming population and rising middle class.

That’s the same reason, by the way, that global elites are so vociferously opposed to President Donald Trump and his agenda. Trade restrictions on China, to protect American jobs? An outrage! The elites can’t make money off American jobs, you see. They’re just so much more expensive than Chinese jobs!

Ask yourself, why is big tech so determined to work with China, despite the political pitfalls? Did Google, which once boasted the hipster motto “don’t be evil,” really think they’d suffer no blowback for developing a censored search engine designed to appease Chinese state censors? Or that working with the Chinese military but not the American one would somehow escape notice? Of course not — but for all its professed “values,” there’s no way a profit-seeking multinational like Google can resist the temptation of a 1.4 billion-person market.

As for the impact on the environment, the elites don’t really care, no matter how many times they jet to various climate change summits around the globe. It’s not that they don’t believe in a looming environmental catastrophe, they just believe they can escape it. “Doomsday capitalism” is how the left-wing magazine CounterPunch describes the trend of billionaires investing in post-apocalypse getaways.

There’s a lot of misinformation out there about how conservatives see the climate. While they’re skeptical of man-made climate change, natural climate change is a different matter. And even if they don’t think climate change is a problem, that doesn’t mean that the massive amounts of pollution generated by the likes of China is Okay. Preserving the natural environment means preserving our heritage — a conservative goal.

But plastic straw bans, meat bans, and one-child policies won’t solve the problem. They simply cause unnecessary pain to ordinary people. Meanwhile, the Chinese dirty coal furnaces keep on burning.

Are you a corporate or Big Tech insider who wants to confidentially reveal wrongdoing or political bias at your company? Reach out to Allum Bokhari at his secure email address allumbokhari@protonmail.com

Allum Bokhari is the senior technology correspondent at Breitbart News.

Fact Check: No, Donald Trump Did Not Decide to Deport Kids with Cancer


Reported by Joel B. Pollak | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/immigration/2019/08/30/fact-check-no-donald-trump-did-not-decide-to-deport-kids-with-cancer/

Joe Biden (Joel Pollak / Breitbart News)

CLAIM: President Donald Trump is ending “a policy that allows migrants to not be deported while they or their family members receive life-saving medical treatments.”

VERDICT: False. There was never any such policy, and all the Trump administration is doing is moving discretion over individual cases from USCIS to ICE.

The media were abuzz Wednesday and Thursday with claims, such as the one quoted from The Hill, above, that Trump is so hell-bent on deporting people that he is even “deporting kids with cancer,” as Vanity Fair put it (adding that Trump was once again living down to comparisons to Adolf Hitler).

Former vice president Joe Biden seized on the news, and added it to his stump speech. He declared, for example, on Thursday night in Greenville, South Carolina:

In just the last few days, we’ve learned his newest target is children. I thought we’d hit the bottom. No! … He decided to take away automatic citizenship from the children of our military serving overseas. … Like every bully in history, he’s trying to make himself seem stronger by picking on the most vulnerable … I thought even he would understand that kids suffering from cancer, cystic fibrosis, and other diseases they can’t get treatment for in their countries were off limits. But like so many other things he’s said, cruelty seems to be the point. … They all have to be unplugged and gone. Ladies and gentlemen — Neuroblastoma! — I can’t imagine, if I had been an immigrant, my son Beau, when he came home from the war, and he ended up having stage 4 glioblastoma … and them telling me, “No, unplug him, send him home.” That’s what it is! That’s what he’s doing! And it’s immoral, and it’s wrong!

Everything about that statement is false.

Trump is not taking away birthright citizenship “from the children of our military serving overseas.” An NBC reporter had to issue a correction: “Experts who have looked at new USCIS [U.S. Citizenship and Immigrant Services] policy say it applies if a service member adopts a child overseas, but children born to service members on deployment would still automatically get citizenship.” (Evidently Joe Biden did not get that particular memo.)

Second, there is no existing policy of “special status” for medical deferment, according to sources who spoke to Breitbart News on background.

What has happened in the past is that illegal aliens — not legal “immigrants,” as Biden suggested — were able to apply to an adjudicator at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for deferment from deportation. The majority of “deferred action” requests were denied by USCIS. Now they will be considered by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which is an enforcement agency (as USCIS is not).

The Associated Press cited letters sent to some Boston-area families ordering them to leave the country within 33 days. The letters apparently did not mention the shift in agency responsibilities. It is not yet clear what is happening in those cases, or why those individuals were not told about the shift from USCIS to ICE.

Nevertheless, what is happening to those individuals does not appear to be the result of a change in “special status” by Trump. Notably, the Associated Press refers to “immigrants” — not “illegal immigrants,” or even “undocumented” immigrants, obscuring the status of those affected (and perhaps frightening some legal immigrants).

People who want to travel to the U.S. for specialized care can still do so, legally, by applying via normal channels.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He earned an A.B. in Social Studies and Environmental Science and Public Policy from Harvard College, and a J.D. from Harvard Law School. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

Today’s TWO Politically INCORRECT Cartoons by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Spousal Support

Joe Biden’s wife Jill, says you need to vote for Biden even if there’s a better candidate because the first priority should be beating Trump.

Jill Biden Supports Husband JoePolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
An adult children’s Book for all ages APOCALI NOW! brilliantly lampoons the left order  HERE

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, the great El Rushbo, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.

Written by Joshua Caplan | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/08/02/man-arrested-at-elizabeth-warren-event-after-allegedly-assaulting-trump-supporter/

DETROIT, MI – JULY 24: Democratic presidential candidate U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) participates in a Presidential Candidates Forum at the NAACP 110th National Convention on July 24, 2019 in Detroit, Michigan. The theme of this years Convention is, When We Fight, We Win. (Photo by Bill Pugliano/Getty Images)

Police in Tempe, Arizona, arrested a man at a campaign event for Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) on Thursday after a scuffle with members of a pro-Trump group protesting the 2020 candidate’s stump speech.

According to the Washington Post, the man was taken into police custody after refusing to leave the Marquee Theater at the request of the venue’s security. A member of the AZ Patriots told the Post that the man attempted to rip a cellphone from the hands of one of the group’s members who was filming the event. Some of the group’s members wore red pro-Trump “Make America Great Again” baseball caps and unfurled a pro-Trump banner while protesting “the socialism that [Warren’s] peddling,” members said.

The AZ Patriots describe themselves as a group of activists and citizen reporters standing “boldly for American values and Conservative principals.”

Tempe Police Sgt. Kevin Renwick told reporters that the man will face charges, saying the matter is “pretty cut and dried.” In a statement, Tempe Police Department spokesperson said the man will be charged with “assault and disorderly conduct for confronting another subject at the event.” 

AZ Patriots member Jennifer Harrison told the Post that Warren’s campaign staffers were “rude” to the group and held up signs to block their view.

“[W]e left peacefully, no problem,” she recounted about being asked to leave the event. “We respect the law.”

As the group was walking toward the exit, the man became enraged, tried to take a group members’ cellphone and “came after me and tried to take a swing at me,” said Harrison.

“Liberals cannot keep their hands to themselves at these events,” she stated. “They see a Make America Great Again hat and they become unglued.”

This is far from the first instance in which Trump supporters have been subjected to threats and violence.
Breitbart News editor-at-large John Nolte has documented 639 acts of violence against Trump supporters, many of which corporate media has downplayed, ignored entirely, or approved and encouraged.

Top DCCC Staffers Quit Amid Growing Concerns over ‘Diversity’


Written by Hannah Bleau | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/07/30/top-dccc-staffers-quit-amid-growing-concerns-over-diversity/

U.S. Rep. Cheri Bustos, D-Ill., speaks during the Polk County Democrats Steak Fry, Saturday, Sept. 30, 2017, in Des Moines, Iowa. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall)

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) has been under intense pressure amid growing concerns over diversity that saw top staffers resign Monday after those conflicts boiled over into the public arena.

DCCC Chairwoman Cheri Bustos (D-IL) has been facing complaints from Congressional Black Caucus and Congressional Hispanic Caucus members who have been unhappy with the lack of minority representation within the DCCC.

“There is not one person of color — black or brown, that I’m aware of — at any position of authority or decision making in the DCCC,” Rep. Marcia Fudge (D-OH) said. “It is shocking, it is shocking, and something needs to be done about it.”

Bustos flew back to Washington D.C.  to hold an emergency meeting to address the internal strife within the organization. Tensions boiled over, and DCCC executive director Allison Jaslow quit during the meeting.

Politico reported:

At the beginning of the meeting, Jaslow resigned and left the session immediately. The meeting — which was described by several sources as spirited and pointed — lasted more than an hour and a half.

“When I was in eighth grade, I decided that my life would be dedicated to serving my country. I did that first in uniform but since have tried to be a force of good in our politics,” Jaslow, an Iraq War veteran, said in a statement later. “And sometimes selfless service means having the courage to take a bow for the sake of the mission — especially when the stakes are so high.”

Tensions continued to boil over, and the domino effect continued:

And in the next 10 hours, much of the senior staff was out: Jared Smith, the communications director and another Bustos ally; Melissa Miller, a top DCCC communications aide; Molly Ritner, political director; Nick Pancrazio, deputy executive director; and Van Ornelas, the DCCC’s director of diversity.

Jacqui Newman, the chief operating officer for the campaign arm, will serve as interim executive director and facilitate the search for a permanent replacement, Bustos said in a statement late Monday.

According to the Hill, one lawmaker called Monday evening’s mass shakeup a “Monday Night Massacre.”

Cheri campaigned as all things to all people, telling blue dogs one thing, telling progressives another. So inevitably once in office she would disappoint them,” the lawmaker added.

Bustos said that it was a “sobering day filled with tough conversations” and promised to put the DCCC “back on path to protect and expand our majority, with a staff that truly reflects the diversity of our Democratic caucus and our party.”

The high tensions within the DCCC mirror the bigger power struggle between House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and the far-left members of the “Squad” – Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Ilhan Omar (D-MN), Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), and Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) – who aim to move the Democrat Party farther left in terms of ideology and self-imposed racial-based quotas. However, moderate Democrats worry that the extreme left-wing flank will alienate moderate voters and cost them crucial elections.

This was not the first time Bustos has faced criticism for being too “moderate.”

As Breitbart News reported:

In January, Bustos received push back from groups such as the Justice Democrats who said she needs to support more progressive policies.

“We do not support Cheri Bustos as leader of the DCCC,” said spokesman Waleed Shahid. “Bustos has not supported progressive policies like Medicare for All, free college, a Green New Deal, or ending private prisons and immigration detention facilities.”

Justice Democrats also criticized her for receiving campaign funds mostly from corporate political action committees and not small donors, according to USA Today.

Bustos did not respond to Politico‘s request for comment.

Klein: James Comey Peddling Falsehoods with ‘Questions’ for Mueller


Written by Aaron Klein | 

URL of the original posting site: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/07/23/klein-james-comey-peddling-falsehoods-with-questions-for-mueller/

This combination photo shows President Donald Trump speaking during a roundtable discussion on tax policy in White Sulphur Springs, W.Va., on April 5, 2018, left, and former FBI director James Comey speaking during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington on June 8, 2017. Trump fired off …
AP Photo/Evan Vucci, left, and Andrew Harnik
 

NEW YORK — Disgraced former FBI Director James Comey has been making the media rounds peddling a list of “questions” that he compiled and published on the Lawfare blog in a posting titled, “What I Would Ask Robert Mueller.”

Comey’s “questions” are deceptively framed in a manner clearly aimed at attempting to perpetuate the Russia collusion conspiracy even though Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s extensive report found no evidence of any collusion or coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Below are the obvious answers to Comey’s “questions” on Russia, with the answers coming from Mueller’s report itself in addition to other documentation.

1 – Did you find that there were a series of contacts between the Trump campaign and individuals with ties to the Russian government?

Perhaps Comey failed to read Mueller’s actual report, which concluded (emphasis added):

The investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons knowingly or intentionally coordinated with the IRA’s interference operation.

In particular, the investigation examined whether these contacts involved or resulted in coordination or a conspiracy with the Trump Campaign and Russia, including with respect to Russia providing assistance to the Campaign in exchange for any sort of favorable treatment in the future. Based on the available information, the investigation did not establish such coordination.

Comey should also refer to the following section of the Mueller report, which related that Russia didn’t even know how to contact the incoming Trump administration after the billionaire mogul won the 2016 election:

As soon as news broke that Trump had been elected President, Russian government officials and prominent Russian businessmen began trying to make inroads into the new Administration. They appeared not to have preexisting contacts and struggled to connect with senior officials around the President-Elect. As explained below, those efforts entailed both official contact through the Russian Embassy in the United States and outreaches — sanctioned at high levels of the Russian government — through business rather than political contacts.

The Mueller report details the hilarity of Russian President Vladimir Putin having trouble reaching Trump’s team to offer simple congratulations:

At approximately 3 a.m. on election night, Trump Campaign press secretary Hope Hicks received a telephone call on her personal cell phone from a person who sounded foreign but was calling from a number with a DC area code. Although Hicks had a hard time understanding the person, she could make out the words “Putin call.” Hicks told the caller to send her an email.

The following morning, on November 9, 2016, Sergey Kuznetsov, an official at the Russian Embassy to the United States, emailed Hicks from his Gmail address with the subject line, “Message from Putin.” Attached to the email was a message from Putin, in both English and Russian, which Kuznetsov asked Hicks to convey to the President-Elect. In the message, Putin offered his congratulations to Trump for his electoral victory, stating he “look[ ed] forward to working with [Trump] on leading Russian-American relations out of crisis.”

Hicks forwarded the email to [Jared] Kushner, asking, “Can you look into this? Don’t want to get duped but don’t want to blow off Putin!” Kushner stated in Congressional testimony that he believed that it would be possible to verify the authenticity of the forwarded email through the Russian Ambassador, whom Kushner had previously met in April 2016. Unable to recall the Russian Ambassador’s name, Kushner emailed Dimitri Simes of CNI, whom he had consulted previously about Russia, see Volume I, Section IV.A.4, supra, and asked, “What is the name of Russian ambassador?” Kushner forwarded Simes’s response — which identified Kislyak by name — to Hicks. After checking with Kushner to see what he had learned, Hicks conveyed Putin’s letter to transition officials. Five days later, on November 14, 2016, Trump and Putin spoke by phone in the presence of Transition Team members, including incoming National Security Advisor Michael Flynn.

Comey’s team further cited Petr Aven, a Russian national in charge of Alfa-Bank, Russia’s largest commercial bank. Mueller’s report states: “Aven also testified that Putin spoke of the difficulty faced by the Russian government in getting in touch with the incoming Trump Administration. According to Aven, Putin indicated that he did not know with whom formally to speak and generally did not know the people around the President-Elect.”

If Comey really wants to get into the weeds, he may do well to review the particulars of each instance of contact between members or surrogates of the campaign and individuals affiliated with Russia as thoroughly documented in Mueller’s report. In each case and with no exception, Mueller found no evidence of wrongdoing.

2 – In particular, did you find that a Trump foreign policy adviser learned that the Russians had dirt on Hillary Clinton in the form of thousands of emails?

This will be answered together with Comey’s next “question.”

3 – Did you find that the Trump foreign policy adviser said the Trump campaign had received indications from the Russian government that it could assist the campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to candidate Clinton?

Once again, Comey is trying to stir things up based on questions that were already answered inside Mueller’s report.

A reminder: as referenced above, Mueller concluded, “The investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons knowingly or intentionally coordinated with the IRA’s interference operation.”

Anyway, Comey here is referring to one episode involving George Papadopoulos, a foreign policy panel adviser tangentially involved with Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.

The Justice Department’s filing against Papadopoulos documents that he was allegedly told by Joseph Mifsud, a Maltese academic plagued by allegations of suspicious associations, that on a trip to Moscow “he (the Professor) learned that the Russians had obtained ‘dirt’ on then-candidate Clinton.”

Former Australian diplomat Alexander Downer later transmitted to the U.S. that he was told about the alleged Russian “dirt” on Clinton by Papadopoulos, reportedly leading to the start of the FBI’s controversial probe of Trump’s campaign under Comey’s leadership at the agency.

No evidence has been presented that Papadopoulos spoke about emails at his meeting with Downer or that Misfurd mentioned emails. But Papadopoulos later described to the FBI that “They [the Russians] have dirt on her”; “the Russians had emails of Clinton”; “they have thousands of emails.”

The Justice Department concluded, “No documentary evidence, and nothing in the email accounts or other communications facilities reviewed by the Office, shows that Papadopoulos shared this information with the Campaign.”

Misfurd himself denies mentioning emails during his meeting with Papadopoulos, as per his testimony to the Justice Department: “But Mifsud denied that he had advance knowledge that Russia was in possession of emails damaging to candidate Clinton, stating that he and Papadopoulos had discussed cybersecurity and hacking as a larger issue and that Papadopoulos must have misunderstood their conversation.”

In his report, Mueller does not at any point claim that Misfurd’s denial was false.

As National Review summarized, Papadopoulos later explained that any reference to emails was to Hillary Clinton’s private email server, a subject of international news reportage at the time of his meeting with Downer.

The magazine reports:

Papadopoulos says the emails he claims Mifsud referred to were not the DNC emails; they were Clinton’s own emails. That is, when Papadopoulos claims that Mifsud told him that Russia had “dirt” in the form of “thousandsof “emails of Clinton,” he understood Mifsud to be alluding to the thousands of State Department and Clinton Foundation emails that Clinton had stored on a private server. These, of course, were the emails that were being intensively covered in the media (including speculation that they might have been hacked by hostile foreign intelligence services) at the time Mifsud and Papadopoulos spoke — i.e., April 2016, when neither Mifsud nor Papadopoulos had any basis to know anything about hacked DNC emails.

The Justice Department, meanwhile, documented:

When interviewed, Papadopoulos and the Campaign officials who interacted with him told the Office that they could not recall Papadopoulos sharing the information that Russia had obtained “dirt” on candidate Clinton in the form of emails or that Russia could assist the Campaign through the anonymous release of information about Clinton.

Papadopoulos stated that he could not clearly recall having told anyone on the Campaign and wavered about whether he accurately remembered an incident in which Clovis had been upset after hearing Papadopoulos tell Clovis that Papadopoulos thought “they have her emails.”

The Campaign officials who interacted or corresponded with Papadopoulos have similarly stated, with varying degrees of certainty, that he did not tell them. Senior policy adviser Stephen Miller, for example, did not remember hearing anything from Papadopoulos or Clovis about Russia having emails of or dirt on candidate Clinton. Clovis stated that he did not recall anyone, including Papadopoulos, having given him non-public information that a foreign Government might be in possession of material damaging to Hillary Clinton.

4 – Did you find that senior members of the Trump campaign met with Russian representatives at Trump Tower after being told in an email that the meeting was part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump?

Here, Comey seems to ignore Mueller’s finding of no evidence of any coordination between Russia and Trump’s campaign. His question seems to suggest wrongdoing on the part of Trump’s team.

Comey should refer to multiple Breitbart News investigations by this reporter into the infamous brief meeting at Trump Tower on June 9, 2016 between individuals tied to Russia, Donald Trump Jr. and other campaign officials. Those probes point to the increasing likelihood of the confab being set up as a dirty trick against Trump’s presidential campaign.

Three Russian participants at the meeting have ties to the controversial Fusion GPS outfit, and two have confirmed ties to Clinton.

Also, email logs brought to light show numerous emails were exchanged between a Clinton associate, Fusion GPS and Trump Tower participants, with the subjects of some of those emails listing the Magnitsky Act, which sanctions Russian officials and was by all accounts the very topic of the Trump Tower meeting.

One Russian participant in the Trump Tower presentation admits to personally knowing Hillary Clinton since the late 1990s and says he “knew” some of the people who worked on Clinton’s 2016 campaign.

Another Russian attendee, a translator, testified that he was previously an interpreter for Hillary herself as well as for John Kerry and Barack Obama.

Questions are also raised by a timeline showing numerous personal meetings between Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson and Trump Tower participants. A Clinton associate, Ed Lieberman, was listed as being present at one and possibly two of those meetings.

Separately, Lieberman met with one Russian participant the same day as the Trump Tower meeting, according to separate testimony.

There are also questions about the initial setup of the Trump Tower meeting, with the publicist who sent the infamous email to Donald Trump Jr. promising “information that would incriminate” Clinton later admitting that he used deliberately hyperbolic language to ensure that the meeting took place. No such incriminating information on Hillary was provided, according to all meeting participants. In testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Robert Goldstone, the publicist, further said that he believes the meeting was a “bait and switch” by a Russian lobbyist seeking a meeting on another matter by misleadingly claiming to be bringing the Trump campaign dirt on Clinton.

5 – Did you find that, despite the fact that candidate Trump said he had “nothing to do with Russia,” his organization had been pursuing a major Moscow project into the middle of the election year and that candidate Trump was regularly updated on developments?

Comey is peddling conspiracies, suggesting that a proposed draft project discussed generally and briefly by a real estate company that routinely builds overseas — a potential project with no secured financing, land or developer — could amount to wrongdoing. Trump did not secure any real estate project in Russia, but even doing so would not have been illegal.

Michael Cohen, a convicted liar and fraudster, claimed during a guilty plea that he lied to Congress when he first said that discussions on a Moscow real estate project ended in January 2016. Cohen later claimed messages were exchanged through June and that he personally updated Trump on the project.

Mueller’s report documents that Cohen “emailed the office of Dmitry Peskov, the Russian government’s press secretary,” but actually sent an email to the wrong address.

Mueller’s office could not find any follow up beyond one phone call with Peskov’s assistant:

On January 20, 2016, Cohen received an email from Elena Poliakova, Peskov’s personal assistant. Writing from her personal email account, Poliakova stated that she had been trying to reach Cohen and asked that he call her on the personal number that she provided. Shortly after receiving Poliakova’s email, Cohen called and spoke to her for 20 minutes. Cohen described to Poliakova his position at the Trump Organization and outlined the proposed Trump Moscow project, including information about the Russian counterparty with which the Trump Organization had partnered. Cohen requested assistance in moving the project forward, both in securing land to build the project and with financing. According to Cohen, Poliakova asked detailed questions and took notes, stating that she would need to follow up with others in Russia.

Cohen could not recall any direct follow-up from Poliakova or from any other representative of the Russian government, nor did the Office identify any evidence of direct follow-up.

Also, Cohen told Mueller’s office that “he elected not to travel at the time because of concerns about the lack of concrete proposals about land plots that could be considered as options for the project.”

6 – Did the Trump campaign report any of its Russian contacts to the FBI? Not even the indications from the Russian government that it could assist the campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to candidate Clinton?

What is Comey even talking about here? Which Russian “contacts” should Trump’s campaign have reported to the FBI? Mueller concluded not only that there was no evidence of wrongdoing, but that “the investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons knowingly or intentionally coordinated” with Russia’s interference campaign. If Trump’s team did not “knowingly or intentionally” collude with Russia, how could they have known to report anything?

For Comey’s misleading insinuation of “indications from the Russian government that it could assist the campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to candidate Clinton,” please see my responses to #3 above, since the credibility-challenged Comey is asking a deceptively phrased question about a disputed episode involving Papadopoulos.

Aaron Klein is Breitbart’s Jerusalem bureau chief and senior investigative reporter. He is a New York Times bestselling author and hosts the popular weekend talk radio program, “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio.” Follow him on Twitter @AaronKleinShow. Follow him on Facebook.

Joshua Klein contributed research to this article. 

Today’s TWO Politically INCORRECT Cartoons by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Not Anti-Semitic?

Omar says she’s not anti-Semitic but her actions and statement speak much louder.

Omar Anti-SemiticPolitical Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Background Noise

People and the electorate are growing numb over the constant allegations of racism coming from the left.

Racist, Racist, RacistPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
See more Legal Insurrection Branco cartoons, click here.

An adult children’s Book for all ages APOCALI NOW! brilliantly lampoons the left order  HERE

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

take our poll – story continues below
  • Did Trump Go Too Far With His “Democrats Don’t Like It Here, They Can Leave” Quote?

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, the great El Rushbo, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.

Today’s TWO Politically INCORRECT Cartoons by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Sick Willie

While the media tried to weave a sleazy fake-news Trump connection to Epstein they totally play down the Bill Clinton/Epstein meetings and plane rides over the years.

Clinton and EpsteinPolitical Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
See more Legal Insurrection Branco cartoons, click here.

An adult children’s Book for all ages APOCALI NOW! brilliantly lampoons the left order  HERE

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, the great El Rushbo, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Heavyweights

Social media giants appear to have their thumbs on the scale of Right vs Left freedom of speech in hopes of tilting the balance in the Democrats favor this 2020 election.

Social Media SummitPolitical Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
More A.F. Branco Cartoons at The Daily Torch.

Branco’s Faux Children’s Book “APOCALI” ORDER  HERE

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

take our poll – story continues below
  • Which Democrat Presidential Hopeful Has The Wildest Campaign Promise So Far?

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, the great El Rushbo, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.

Poll: Democrats Cause Patriotism to Plummet Ahead of July 4th


Written by HARIS ALIC |

Protesters try unsuccessfully to burn an upside down US flag during a protest outside the White House in Washington, DC on November 25, 2014, one day after a grand jury decision not to prosecute a white police officer for the killing of an unarmed black teen in Ferguson, Missouri. AFP …
MLADEN ANTONOV/AFP/Getty
 

The number of Americans who consider themselves “extremely proud” of their country is at a record low ahead of Independence Day.

A new Gallup poll released on Tuesday found that while 70 percent of all U.S. adults say they are proud to be Americans, only 45 percent say they are “extremely” proud of their country.

This was the second consecutive year in which the number of individuals identifying as extremely patriotic fell below 50 percent. Overall the share of Americans identifying as “extremely” patriotic is now at the lowest level since Gallup began asking the question in 2001.

Gallup found the decline in patriotism to be largely driven by Democrats. Of those identifying with the party, only 22 percent said they were “extremely” proud to be Americans. Similarly “subgroups that typically identify as Democrats — women, liberals and younger adults,” also expressed lower levels of patriotism, according to Gallup.

The new polling confirms trends witnessed among Democrats since President Donald Trump took office. The share of Democrats expressing patriotism plummeted by double digits from 43 percent in 2017 to 32 percent in 2018. Although Democrats have historically reported lower levels of pride in their country, this year’s total of 22 percent is the lowest on record since Gallup began measuring the question.

Republicans, on the other hand, continue to express record levels of patriotism. Gallup found that 76 percent of individuals associated with the GOP identified as “extremely” proud to be Americans—only ten percentage points less than the group’s recorded high in 2003.

Even though Gallup shows a correlation between levels of patriotism and which party controls the White House, the level of pride among Democrats since Trump took office is exponentially low. During the administration of President George W. Bush, the percent of Democrats expressing extreme pride in their country never fell under 46 percent. In comparison, during the presidency of Barack Obama the share of Republicans identifying as extremely proud to be American never dropped below 68 percent.

Gallup, however, did find that the two parties more broadly agreed about “American economic achievements,” with 89 percent of Republicans and 64 percent of Democrats expressing pride. Likewise, Republicans and Democrats showed reverence for the U.S. military, with 98 percent of Republicans and 84 percent of Democrats saying they were proud of the institution.

Gallup conducted the poll between June 3 through June 16 by surveying 1,015 adults from across the country. The poll had a margin of error of +\- 4 percentage points.

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Merry Marxists

The Democratic primary presidential debate was nothing more than a competition for who’s the best Marxist Santa Clause. Merry Marxism! Where everything is free but you!

Democratic Primary DebatePolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
See more Legal Insurrection Branco cartoons, click here.

An adult children’s Book for all ages APOCALI NOW! brilliantly lampoons the left order  HERE

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, the great El Rushbo, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Jobama

With Trump’s big economic success among all the other promises made and kept, about all Biden has to offer is bringing us back to more failed Obama style policies.

Biden Obama BaggagePolitical Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
More A.F. Branco cartoons at FlagAnd Cross.com here.

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, the great El Rushbo, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.

Kamala Harris Ignores Question About Child Sex Trafficking to Take Selfies


Reported by ALANA MASTRANGELO |

Kamala Harris Lynne SladkyAP
Lynne SladkyAP

Turning Point USA Director of Hispanic Engagement Anna Paulina questioned Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) on Friday at the Houston International airport about the ramifications of an unsecured United States border. Harris, however, seemed more focused on taking selfies than answering the question.

Sen. Kamala Harris appeared attentive while speaking to Anna Paulina at the airport on Friday, until Paulina introduced herself as “the Hispanic engagement director with Turning Point USA,” at which point, the senator promptly turned to give her attention to somebody else standing nearby.

“I ran into Senator Kamala Harris,” said Paulina to Breitbart News, “As I approached her to talk to her about child sex trafficking at the border and how family reunification is being used by human traffickers and the Cartels to exploit and traffic children, she assumed I wanted a selfie.”

Watch:

“You are directly impacting the Hispanic demographic in a negative way,”said Paulina to the senator, “you are directly impacting what is happening with the children in this country and you are not doing what you are supposed to be doing as a representative.”

Sen. Harris, who shook her head after President Donald Trump called for putting illegal drug cartels and human traffickers out of business at his 2019 State of the Union, ignored Paulina to talk to someone vying for a selfie while someone who appeared to be the senator’s handler moved to stand in front of the TPUSA director.

“Shame on you. You’re not going to win,” said Paulina to Harris, who announced her 2020 candidacy for president in January.

Paulina told Breitbart News that Harris was willing to speak with her — likely assuming that Paulina was approaching her for a selfie — but when “I started questioning her about how open border policies are directly hurting Hispanic women and children, she refused to answer, said Paulina.

“Her assistant told me she had to take selfies with others waiting,” added the TPUSA director, “I find it deeply concerning that a woman, who is running for President of the United States, was more concerned with taking selfies than addressing the trafficking of Hispanic women and children.”

“The loopholes in our immigration systems are exploited on a regular basis,” said Paulina to Breitbart News, “Organized crime is tracking what is happening at our border and with our immigration debate. Elected officials for open borders are lethally impacting people on both sides of the border.”

“It was evident while she was smiling and laughing, and ignoring my questions that she did not care,” said Paulina, “She was more concerned with selfies than children.”

You can follow Alana Mastrangelo on Twitter at @ARmastrangelo and on Instagram.

Americans Just Sent Democrats a Loud and Clear Message About Impeachment: Don’t Do It


Reported By Karista Baldwin | Published April 28, 2019 at 8:01am

Democratic leaders are in a tough spot as their base pushes for the president’s impeachment while most Americans oppose it.

A recent Washington Post/ABC News poll found that the majority of Americans are against impeaching the president following the publication of special counsel Robert Mueller’s report. According to the poll, around 37 percent of Americans are pro-impeachment, a slightly lower figure than last month. Meanwhile, 56 percent of Americans oppose impeachment.

Breaking the results into parties: 62 percent of Democrats responded to the poll in support of impeachment, while 87 percent of Republican respondents opposed to it. Among independents, 36 percent support impeaching the president, showing a drop in the group’s support for impeachment since before the release of the Mueller report, according to January’s Washington Post/ABC News poll. Poll respondents who strongly oppose impeachment also outnumber those who strongly support, with strong opposition at 49 percent and strong support at 29 percent.

According to ABC News, this shows a 10-point rise since August in those strongly opposed to impeachment. It also reflects an 11-point decrease since August in those strongly in favor of impeachment.

The results reveal a dilemma for Democratic politicians at the moment: keeping their increasingly leftist base happy without alienating the majority of Americans who are against impeachment. The impeachment issue has already shown itself to be divisive within the Democratic party. Senators Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris, both Democratic presidential nominee contenders, are placing their bets on pro-impeachment voters. Both senators have publicly urged Congress to initiate impeachment proceedings against Trump.

“I believe Congress should take the steps towards impeachment,” Harris said, reported by CNN. “I believe that we need to get rid of this President.”

Warren has also taken a firm stance in support of impeaching Trump.

“The severity of this misconduct demands that elected officials in both parties set aside political considerations and do their constitutional duty,” Warren wrote on Twitter last week. “That means the House should initiate impeachment proceedings against the President of the United States.”

Meanwhile, old-school Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has taken it upon herself do damage control for her party. Her more pragmatic approach to impeachment has shown itself to be at odds with her younger Democratic colleagues.

“Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country,” Pelosi told The Washington Post in March. “And he’s just not worth it.”

The public’s views on impeachment may be backing Democrats into a lose-lose situation. While Pelosi is working to appeal to the largest group of Americans on the issue of impeachment, she’s risking angering more leftist Democrats.

And while Harris and Warren cite the Mueller report as grounds for impeachment, 58 percent of Americans say that the results of the report had no effect on their view of the Trump administration, according to the Washington Post/ABC poll. In fact, 46 percent of the poll respondents said they won’t be taking the report into consideration when they vote in the 2020 presidential election.

Democratic nominee hopefuls may have to choose between upsetting their more extreme leftist supporters or alienating the general populace, who obviously aren’t eager to initiate impeachment. Either way could cost Democratic contenders their party’s nomination.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: 

Summary

More Info Recent Posts Contact

Karista Baldwin studied constitutional law, politics and criminal justice at the University of Dallas and the University of Texas at Dallas.

Joe Biden Claims ‘World Leaders Begged’ Him to Run Against Donald Trump


Written by WARNER TODD HUSTON |

US Vice President Joe Biden attends the Leaders Summit on Countering ISIL and Countering Violent Extremism at the United Nations in New York on September 29, 2015. AFP PHOTO/MANDEL NGAN (Photo credit should read MANDEL NGAN/AFP/Getty Images)

Former Vice President Joe Biden says that he decided to launch his 2020 presidential campaign, in part, because international heads of state called him to “beg” him to run for president and “save the world.”

The Democrat hopeful made the claim in a call to supporters after he launched his campaign this week, according to the Daily Mail.

“I get calls from people all over the world. World leaders are calling me, and they’re almost begging me to do this, to save the country, save the world,” Biden reportedly said.

President Donald Trump has been a thorn in the side of globalist politicians placing entrenched corporate interests above the needs of their own citizens. On issues such as illegal immigration, NATO contributions, global warming, and Chinese aggression, Trump has bucked international leaders rather than go along to get along. In particular, Germany’s open-borders prime minister Angela Merkel has been repeatedly humiliated in confrontations with Trump.

Biden has tried to frame himself as a populist candidate, bashing Wall Street and pledging to reject campaign cash from federal lobbyists to counteract the Obama administration’s infamously cozy relationship with big banks. However, this admission that globalists see him as their best hope to oust Trump has the potential to hurt his case with voters.

Further, the failure to disclose which nations want him to run brings up further questions about the Biden family’s relationship to the Chinese government, as first exposed in Breitbart News Senior Editor-at-Large Peter Schweizer’s book Secret EmpiresSchweizer suggests that the communist regime was “buying off Biden through his son” with a shady ten-figure deal:

In December of 2013, Hunter Biden flies on Air Force 2 to Beijing, China, with his father. His father meets with Chinese officials, he’s very soft on Beijing. The most important thing that happens 10 days after they return. And that’s when Hunter Biden’s small, private equity firm called Rosemont Seneca Partners gets a $1 billion private equity deal with the Chinese government, not with the Chinese corporation, with the government. And what people need to realize is Hunter Biden has no background in China, he has no background in private equity.

Biden kicked off his campaign Thursday morning with a video where he repeated the hoax narrative that Trump called neo-Nazis “very fine people” in the aftermath of the 2017 riots in Charlottesville, Virginia.

The same day, a campaign spokeswoman asserted that Biden asked Barack Obama not to endorse his former Vice President because the candidate needs to win the primary “on his own merits.”

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston.

Day 1 of New Campaign: Biden Chucks Obama Under the Nearest Bus


Commentary By Malachi Bailey | Published April 26, 2019 at 8:56am | Modified April 26, 2019 at 8:57am

Former Vice President Joe Biden finally announced his decision to run for president, and he threw former President Barack Obama under the bus on the first day.

Biden joined the crowded field of 2020 Democrats on Thursday and immediately received praise from Obama, but he stopped short of endorsing his former running mate, according to CNBC.

“President Obama has long said that selecting Joe Biden as his running mate in 2008 was one of the best decisions he ever made,”Obama spokesperson Katie Hill said in a statement.

“He relied on the Vice President’s knowledge, insight, and judgment throughout both campaigns and the entire presidency. The two forged a special bond over the last 10 years and remain close today.”

But Obama didn’t explicitly endorse Biden, and that’s because Biden doesn’t want Obama’s endorsement.

“I asked President Obama not to endorse,” Biden said Thursday. “Whoever wins this nomination should win it on their own merits.”

Obviously, Biden’s claim that he wants to win the race on his own merits is questionable. Any candidate who wants to become the next president would accept an endorsement if it would help his or her cause. Obama is extremely popular among the far left, so it’s confusing why Biden would tell him not to endorse.

However, Obama is not particularly liked outside of far-left circles, which could be the key to understanding why Biden denied a potential endorsement. It seems as if Biden is trying to distance himself from the former president in order to make a broader appeal to the American people.

The options right now for moderate Democrats are pretty slim. Other than Biden, the front-runners are far left, including Sens. Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, and Elizabeth Warren. Biden will definitely need a way to differentiate himself from his progressive competition, and distancing himself from Obama is a good start to wooing more moderate Democrats. Besides, radical Democrats don’t like Biden anyway. He’s too white, too old and doesn’t have the right gender.

Regardless of Biden’s strategy, it was probably deeply insulting for Obama to have Biden ask him not to endorse his candidacy. Obama’s legacy is stained to the point where his endorsement isn’t even wanted.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Summary

More Info Recent Posts Contact

Malachi Bailey is a writer from Ohio with a background in history, education and philosophy. He has led multiple conservative groups and is dedicated to the principles of free speech, privacy and peace.

Today’s TWO Politically INCORRECT Cartoons by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Glass Housewife

Hillary, who actually colluded with Russians (Dossier), smashed phones, hide 30,000 emails, the Uranium Deal, Pay to Play and the Clinton Foundation, and Bleach Bit her illegal private server, Says Trump should be indicted for charges he’s been cleared on.

Hillary – Trump Should be IndictedPolitical Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Recyclable

Joe Biden is enjoying good poll numbers right after launching his candidacy for President, possibly the same polls Hillary used in 2016.

Joe Biden Poll NumbersPolitical Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
More A.F. Branco Cartoons at The Daily Torch.

Branco’s Faux Children’s Book “APOCALI” ORDER  HERE

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

take our poll – story continues below
  • Should incarcerated criminals have the right to vote?

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, the great El Rushbo, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: