Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Hillary Clinton’

Trump: I’m Authorizing Total Declassification Of All Docs Related To Hillary’s Alleged Plan To Smear Me


By  Hank Berrien |   | DailyWire.com

U.S. President Donald Trump walks in a corridor of the White House to greet visitors, while a portrait of Hillary Clinton hangs on the wall, March 7, 2017 in Washington, DC . / Aude Guerrucci-Pool/Getty Images

On Tuesday night, following the news that Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe had declassified documents showing former CIA Director John Brennan had briefed former President Barack Obama about the plan that Hillary Clinton allegedly approved to smear Donald Trump about his supposed connections to Moscow, President Trump tweeted that he would authorize the release of the full, unredacted documents related to the case.

As The Daily Wire reported on Tuesday:

Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe declassified documents on Tuesday showing that former CIA Director John Brennan briefed former President Barack Obama about the plan that Hillary Clinton allegedly approved to smear then-candidate Donald Trump to Russia as a way of distracting from her email scandal.

“Ratcliffe declassified Brennan’s handwritten notes – which were taken after he briefed Obama on the intelligence the CIA received – and a CIA memo, which revealed that officials referred the matter to the FBI for potential investigative action,” Fox News reported. “That referral was sent to then-FBI Director James Comey and then-Deputy Assistant Director of Counterintelligence Peter Strzok.”

A source that was familiar with the documents told Fox News that, despite claims from the media and Democrats, the information was not “Russian disinformation,” and the fact that Brennan reportedly briefed Obama on it is a sign that it was serious.

“This is not Russian disinformation. Even Brennan knew, or he wouldn’t be briefing the president of the United States on it,” the source said. “There is a high threshold to orally brief the president of the United States and he clearly felt this met that threshold.”

In late July, former Obama senior adviser Valerie Jarrett suggested that the public stop focusing on whether the Obama administration used the FBI to spy on Donald Trump in 2016.

Appearing on Fox Business with host Maria Bartiromo, Jarrett stated, “Well, Maria, look, I have a high degree of confidence that our intelligence community, our investigators comported themselves responsibly. Look, Lindsey Graham is the one that encouraged Senator McCain to turn over the dossier in the first place to the FBI.”

The Daily Wire had reported that the Department of Justice’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG) found 17 “inaccuracies and omissions” in FISA warrant applications to spy on Carter Page. But the FBI ignored information from a U.S. government agency that said it had a prior relationship with Page involving contacts with Russian intelligence officers. The Daily Wire noted, “The FBI hid this information from the FISA court in order to obtain another warrant to continue investigating Page, even though it knew there was nothing to investigate. By spying on Page, the FBI gained access to other Trump associates to spy on in order to find some evidence that could be used against Trump.:

Jarrett added, “So, I can’t tell you all of the reasons why Comey went forward with his investigation. Maybe this was one piece of a bigger puzzle. But I do know that it’s nearly four years ago and I don’t understand why our focus isn’t on what’s happening right now and today. That’s the investigation I would like to see going on.”

HUGE! Clinton Campaign Attorney Mark Elias Admitted in Testimony He Sent the Bill from Fusion GPS for Dossier Directly to Campaign Manager Robbie Mook


Reported By Jim Hoft | Published May 11, 2020 at 8:58pm

Hillary Campaign Manager Robbie Mook

On Saturday The Gateway Pundit reported that thanks to newly released transcripts Hillary Campaign chairman John Podesta admitted during testimony that both the DNC and Hillary Campaign split the cost of the bogus Trump-Russia dossier in 2016 that initially launched the attempted coup against Donald Trump. John Podesta was Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman in 2016.

CNN reported in October 2017 that Podesta and then DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz “both denied to congressional Russia investigators that they had any knowledge about an arrangement to pay for opposition research on President Donald Trump, three sources familiar with the matter told CNN.” But that is not what John Podesta told House Intelligence investigators under oath in his December 2017 testimony.

John Podesta admitted under oath that the DNC and the Hillary Campaign split the cost of the Trump-Russia dossier.

Now we know.
Via M3thods:

That’s from page 13 of his testimony.

Now on Monday night investigative reporter Paul Sperry reported that Hillary Clinton Campaign Lawyer Mark Elias testified that he sent the Fusion GPS bills for their work to Clinton Campaign Manager Robbie Mook.


Paul Sperry@paulsperry_

BREAKING: Clinton campaign lawyer Marc Elias testified he sent the bills from Fusion GPS to campaign manager Robby Mook, yet Mook has publicly denied knowing anything about the dossier at the time

27.4K people are talking about this


The Mark Elias transcript was released on Friday.

Here is Elias’s testimony where he admits Hillary’s Campaign Manager Robbie Mook was sent the bill for the Fusion GPS dossier!

page 16 from his testimony

More on page 17

This is amazing. Not only did Podesta admit the Clinton Campaign split the bill for the dossier with the DNC. But now we have the Clinton attorney admitting he sent the bill to Clinton Campaign Manager Robbie Mook!

This was 100% a Hillary Clinton, DNC operation. And it was 100% lies on Trump.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: 

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


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Creepy Crooked and Corrupt

Hillary is endorsing Biden because she shares his same values, like assorted sexual assault scandals?
Hillary Endorses BidenPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.
Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – $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, Rush Limbaugh, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.

Michigan governor endorses Biden ahead of primary


Posted

Michigan governor endorses Biden ahead of primary / © UPI Photo

Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) on Thursday endorsed Joe Biden for president, a significant boost for the former vice president ahead of next week’s primary in the Wolverine State. Whitmer, whose state’s primary will allocate 125 pledged delegates, cast Biden as an advocate for working families, citing his work on health care, bailing out the auto industry and more during his time in the Obama administration.

“Working families in Michigan need a president who will show up and fight for them, and Joe Biden has proven time and again that he has our backs,” she said in a statement. “Michiganders have grit. We’re tough. We know what it’s like to be overlooked and counted out. And we know that when you get knocked down, you pick yourself up and get back to work. Joe Biden has been right there with us in the tough fights.” 

“Joe Biden is the candidate we need to defeat Donald Trump in November. He’s always had our backs. Now, I’m proud to have his,” added Whitmer, who is also being named a national co-chair to Biden’s campaign.

Whitmer said in an interview on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” that Biden’s commitment to expanding health care was personal to her, noting that the same type of brain tumor killed both her mother and Biden’s son.

“I have commiserated about Joe about this very thing,” she said of her mother’s brain cancer diagnosis. “I know his commitment.”

Biden is set for up for a battle in Michigan next week with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who narrowly took the state’s primary in 2016 over former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton

The Wolverine State is a key contest for both candidates’ claims of support from white working-class voters. The state was one of the key victories, along with others in the Rust Belt, for President Trump in the 2016 general election.

Whitmer, who was endorsed by Biden during her 2018 gubernatorial bid, has steadily gained a national profile after winning the gubernatorial election two years ago and delivering the Democratic Party’s response to President Trump’s State of the Union in February.  Her endorsement comes just one day after former Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm also threw her support behind the former vice president.

They are just the latest in a slew of establishment Democratic figures falling in line behind Biden after resounding victories in South Carolina and several Super Tuesday states vaulted him back into the front-runner position in the primary.

Though Biden put up underwhelming showings in Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada, a 30-point win in the Palmetto State and victories in 10 out of 14 Super Tuesday states have revived his campaign, setting him up to have a narrow delegate lead after all of California’s primary votes are tallied.

Sanders, meanwhile, won California, Colorado, Utah and his home state of Vermont on Super Tuesday.

Biden appears set to capitalize on his Super Tuesday resurgence in upcoming primary and caucus states, which consist heavily of demographics that appear to favor the former vice president. Six more states will cast ballots on Tuesday, with Michigan representing the heftiest delegate haul.

 

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


A.F. Branco Cartoon – With Friends Like These…

We once again find the Clinton’s in full-blown denial, this time in regard to any involvement in the Epstein suicide.

Bill and Hillary Clinton about EpsteinPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Smash Hit

It Maybe time for Hillary and Bill to get out the bleach bit and hammers to limit any incriminating evidence in the Epstein investigation.

Clinton’s Connection to EpsteinPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
More A.F. Branco cartoons at FlagAnd Cross.com here.

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

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. 

Democrats plot strategy to win back Senate


Written

Democrats plot strategy to win back Senate
© Greg Nash

Democrats planning their bid to win back control of the Senate will run hard against the Washington swamp next year, repurposing one of President Trump’s most effective campaign messages from the 2016 election as their own.

Top party operatives are poll-testing messages aimed at winning over voters who are fed up with a gridlocked capital, searching for ways to build an advantage among swing voters who may still like Trump, but not the senators who are seeking reelection in 2020.

And while Democrats could not convince some of their best-known candidates to forgo long shot presidential campaigns in favor of bids for Senate seats, the party will now rely on a once-unorthodox stable of candidates with little or no experience in elected office. 

It is a strategy reminiscent of 2006 and 2018, when House Democrats ousted Republican majorities on the backs of candidates with unusual profiles. This year, the stable of Senate Democratic candidates includes more women and veterans than has been typical in recent cycles.

“In races around the country, there are strong Democrats stepping up to run who fit their states and will be a breath of fresh air with new perspectives to bring to the Senate,” said Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), who heads the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

When former Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D) and Rep. Joaquin Castro (D) opted against challenging Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), Democrats turned to M.J. Hegar, a veteran and businesswoman who lost a closer than expected bid for Congress last year. 

In Iowa, another former congressional candidate, Theresa Greenfield, is Democrats’ preferred candidate against Sen. Joni Ernst (R), though she faces a primary fight.

Arizona Sen. Martha McSally (R) will face Mark Kelly, the retired astronaut making his first run for public office. In North Carolina and Maine, Democrats recruited two state legislators to challenge Sens. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine). 

Those candidates will pitch themselves as fresh-faced outsiders who can shake up a corrupt and broken political system — even if, as is the case in Texas, Iowa and North Carolina, the favored Democratic candidate has lost a race before.

“In this race for Senate, it’s time for somebody who will stand up and fight, to build an economy that works for everybody, for the health care that each family deserves, and to reform the corrupt political system in Washington,” former North Carolina state Sen. Cal Cunningham (D) said in a video announcing his bid to unseat Tillis.

Complicating matters for Democrats, only two states that voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016 have incumbent
Republican senators today: Maine and Colorado. To win back the Senate majority, Democrats must win states like North Carolina, Arizona, Iowa and even Texas — all states that gave Trump their electoral votes three years ago and where he remains either popular or at least competitive today.

That has Democrats also focusing on a different villain: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). Several Democratic groups are testing whether portraying Republican senators as McConnell’s minions can be effective. 

Those surveys and public polls show McConnell is surprisingly well-known, and not in a good way. 

A Harvard-Harris Poll survey conducted in May pegged McConnell’s favorable rating at just 23 percent, lower than Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), at 36 percent, or Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), at 27 percent. His unfavorable rating stood at 44 percent, lower than Pelosi’s 50 percent but higher than every other politician tested except Trump, Clinton and Vice President Pence.

In a poll conducted for the Democratic group End Citizens United, Global Strategies Group found reading messages against McConnell moved voters toward Democratic candidates more effectively than messages against Trump or the Republican Congress at large.

“Mitch McConnell is beholden to special interests and he’s blocking progress on everything from making prescription drugs more affordable to addressing political corruption to making health care more affordable,” said Patrick Burgwinkle, who heads communications for End Citizens United.

McConnell appears twice in Maine House Speaker Sara Gideon’s (D) video announcing her bid against Collins. Greenfield lumped Ernst and McConnell together in her own video. In Texas, Hegar called Cornyn “that tall guy lurking behind” McConnell.

More than half of the 295 advertisements the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee is currently running on Facebook show McConnell’s image or mention his name.

Attacks against national party leaders are nothing new to Republicans, who spent several cycles using Pelosi as shorthand to tie every prominent Democratic challenger to liberal San Francisco values.

Republicans aren’t convinced that McConnell will be the poison pill that they saw in Pelosi.

“You use party leaders in midterms to polarize an electorate when you have registration advantages in the state or district. In a presidential election the electorate is polarized and motivated. The middle isn’t making a decision to show up for a presidential election based upon a three-way bank shot in the side-pocket about whether a senator serves in the same conference as somebody else,” said Josh Holmes, a longtime Senate Republican strategist and top aide to McConnell.

“The reality for him is that any resource spent attacking Mitch McConnell is a resource that is not used to attack his Republican colleagues, and that’s just the way he likes it,” Holmes said.

But Democrats hope the focus on corruption can be the beginning of a discussion of other issues, too: That health care costs rise because of pressure from special interest groups or that gun safety legislation has not passed because of the power of the National Rifle Association.

Democrats “can make the case that Mitch McConnell and special interests in Washington are the ones preventing these priorities from being addressed,” Burgwinkle said.

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


A.F. Branco Cartoon – In The Bag

Democrats are very excited about their recent poll numbers being higher than Trump’s, but wait a minute, haven’t we been here before? I’m sure Hillary remembers.

2020 Democrat Poll NumbersPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco 92019.
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!

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

THREE New Politically INCORRECT Cartoons by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Changing of the Guard

The Democrat party was once called the party of JFK, but as they further to the left, they’re starting to look more like the party of AOC.

The Party of AOCPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Pet Smart

Stephanopoulos interviews President Trump on a Hypothetical situation involving foreign oppo-research, and now the left is in fake outraged mode again, not having a problem with Hillary’s collusion with Russia and the Steele dossier.

Stephanopoulos, Foreign Oppo-ResearchPolitical Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Happy Birthday Mr. President

Trump turns 73. Happy Birthday Mr. President with a cake complete with fake news candles.

Trump 73rd BirthdayPolitical Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
See more Conservative Daily News cartoons 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 seen 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 James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, the great El Rushbo, and most recently President Trump.

New Cache of 339 Emails Shows Fusion GPS Emailing Anti-Trump Intel Directly to Obama’s DOJ: Report


Reported By Benjamin Arie | Published May 2, 2019 at 3:55pm

It’s no secret that liberals across the country have tried desperately to stop Donald Trump since he became a candidate, but their efforts to undermine him may now be coming back at themselves like a boomerang.

A scandal which began before the 2016 election was even held has just exploded, at least if a bombshell report from the watchdog group Judicial Watch is accurate. The organization has been diligently unraveling the facts around Fusion GPS, and what they recently found is jaw-dropping.

Fusion GPS, of course, is the “opposition research” firm which was contracted by the DNC to dig up dirt on Trump in the run-up to the election. The company is linked to the infamous dossier containing scandalous — and thoroughly debunked — claims about the president, but the controversy is much wider than just those papers.

It now appears that someone working for Fusion GPS was purposely and frequently collaborating with a deputy attorney general within the Obama administration, sending anti-Trump material in a way that was certainly unethical if not completely illegal.

The Obama-era official is Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr, and the anti-Trump figure working for Fusion GPS was his wife.

TRENDING: Ukrainians Say Obama WH Tried Getting Them To Do Hillary’s Dirty Work in Jan. 2016

“[A] series of ‘Hi Honey’ emails from Nellie Ohr to her high-ranking federal prosecutor husband and his colleagues raise the prospect that Hillary Clinton-funded opposition research was being funneled into the Justice Department during the 2016 election through a back-door marital channel,” explained veteran investigative journalist John Solomon for The Hill.

“Ohr has admitted to Congress that, during the 2016 presidential election, she worked for Fusion GPS — the firm hired by Democratic nominee Clinton and the Democratic National Committee to perform political opposition research,” the journalist said.

That kind of research is often used by political campaigns against their opponents, and is not by itself off limits. But Judicial Watch uncovered 339 emails which reveal that Nellie Ohr likely crossed the line by using her marriage as a political tool, and sending pages of anti-Trump research directly to official Department of Justice email accounts.

“They clearly show that Ohr sent reams of open-source intelligence to her husband, Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr, and on some occasions to at least three DOJ prosecutors: Lisa Holtyn, Ivana Nizich and Joseph Wheatley,” Solomon said.

“Such overt political content flowing into the email accounts of a DOJ charged with the nonpartisan mission of prosecuting crimes is jarring enough. It raises additional questions about potential conflicts of interest when it is being injected by a spouse working as a Democratic contractor trying to defeat Trump,” he continued.

But the scandal is deeper than just emails. Nellie and Bruce Ohr apparently had key roles in pushing the debunked Trump dossier and the false narrative that the future president was colluding with Russia.

“For instance, just 24 days after the anti-Trump screed was emailed, both Ohrs met in Washington with British intelligence operative Christopher Steele,” Solomon said. “She said she learned that Steele had concerns that he hoped the DOJ or FBI would investigate, with help from her husband.”

And that appears to be exactly what happened.

“The next day, Bruce Ohr used his official DOJ position to go to then-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe with Steele’s allegations (later to become known as the Steele dossier), and the bureau opened its first investigation into Russia collusion,” he said.

There are obvious parallels to Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, the two FBI officials who were also having an affair all while texting back and forth about how Trump should be stopped. More and more, it looks like partisan politics and anti-Trump collaboration was widespread within agencies which are supposed to be unbiased.

That is the real scandal here: Not that liberals tried to uncover dirt on a candidate, but that official government personnel within our own government eagerly participated in the partisan witch hunt.

It looks like there was collusion, but not by Trump.

Instead, the real collusion took place between Obama-era government officials and activists who saw nothing as off limits in order to install Hillary Clinton as president — and that should alarm every American, no matter their party.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: 

Summary

More Info Recent Posts Contact

Benjamin Arie is an independent journalist and writer. He has personally covered everything ranging from local crime to the U.S. president as a reporter in Michigan, before focusing on national politics. Ben frequently travels to Latin America and has spent years living in Mexico. Follow Benjamin on Facebook

Trump Furious as New Docs Show Potential Charges Against Hillary Quashed by Obama’s DOJ


Reported By Jack Davis | Published March 13, 2019 at 9:46am

New information shows the Justice Department was a “broken and corrupt machine” during its investigation of Hillary Clinton’s emails, President Donald Trump said Wednesday.

This week, Republican Rep. Doug Collins of Georgia released 370 pages worth of transcripts from testimony given to the House Judiciary Committee last summer. Former FBI lawyer Lisa Page, who shared her anti-Trump sentiments with former FBI special agent Peter Strozek in a series of text messages that were later uncovered, testified about the 2016 investigation into Clinton’s use of a private email server while she was secretary of state.

“The American people deserve to know what transpired in the highest echelons of the FBI during that tumultuous time for the bureau,” Collins said in a statement.

Trump cut to the chase in a pair of Wednesday tweets that condemned the Justice Department under the leadership of former President Barack Obama and the FBI under the leadership of former Director James Comey, whom Trump later fired.

“The just revealed FBI Agent Lisa Page transcripts make the Obama Justice Department look exactly like it was, a broken and corrupt machine. Hopefully, justice will finally be served. Much more to come!” the president tweeted.

“Comey testified (under oath) that it was a ‘unanimous’ decision on Crooked Hillary,” he said. “Lisa Page transcripts show he LIED.”

Trump focused on a part of the transcript in which Texas Republican Rep. John Ratcliffe was questioning Page, Fox News reported.

“So let me if I can, I know I’m testing your memory,” Ratcliffe began as he questioned Page under oath, according to the transcript, “but when you say advice you got from the Department, you’re making it sound like it was the Department that told you: You’re not going to charge gross negligence because we’re the prosecutors and we’re telling you we’re not going to –“

“That is correct,” Page said before Ratcliffe could finish.

Page said she and other FBI officials objected to Justice Department decisions, according to excerpts published in The Washington Post.

She said that “we all at FBI” also disagreed with the ruling to let “fact witnesses” — Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson — sit in on Clinton’s interview about her email scandal. Page said that decision was made by Justice Department officials and not within the FBI.

“It is not typically appropriate or operationally necessary to have fact witnesses attend an interview,” Page said in the transcript, noting that no other witness was allowed to bring such an entourage.

Ratcliffe tweeted Tuesday that Page essentially confirmed that “the FBI was ordered by the Obama DOJ not to consider charging Hillary Clinton for gross negligence in the handling of classified information.”

Page said the DOJ and FBI had “multiple conversations … about charging gross negligence.”

She denied the FBI “blew over” potentially charging Clinton with gross negligence under the Espionage Act.

Officials considered the charge, she said, but thought it would be “constitutionally vague,” without any recent precedent, and “they did not feel that they could sustain a charge.”

Page said Richard Scott of the Justice Department advised against making the harsher charge, according to The Post. Scott had not responded to news outlet as of Wednesday morning.

DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz criticized FBI officials for showing their biases in the Clinton case.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Summary

More Info Recent Posts Contact

Jack Davis is a free-lance writer who joined The Western Journal in July 2015 and chronicled the campaign that saw President Donald Trump elected. Since then, he has written extensively for The Western Journal on the Trump administration as well as foreign policy and military issues.

Famous Trump Painter Redefines ‘Border Emergency’ with Newest Work


Reported By Ben Marquis | Published March 7, 2019 at 4:11pm  | Modified March 7, 2019 at 4:13pm

While much of the art world and entertainment industry leans decisively to the left, there are those among them who hold a more conservative ideology, and some of those are increasingly speaking out about their beliefs through the use of their own talents.

One of those is conservative artist Jon McNaughton, a Utah-based artist who over the years has painted a number of compelling portraits that were first exceptionally critical of former President Barack Obama and are now supportive of President Donald Trump.

McNaughton’s latest work of art centers around the current sharp divide between Trump, who aims to secure the nation by securing the southern border, and numerous prominent Democrats who have staunchly opposed and obstructed those efforts.

The painting is titled “National Emergency,” and it features a number of prominent Democrats standing atop a tattered American flag — while holding various flags representing other nations or groups — as the president looks sadly upon the lost doll of a little immigrant girl forced to make the dangerous and illicit cross-border journey into the U.S. … as a caravan of countless illegal migrants approach the border in the distance behind them.

In McNaughton’s description of the work, he wrote, “In my new painting, the Democrat establishment declares victory against President Trump as he announces a national emergency to secure the border. They proudly hold the flags they represent and cherish.

“Our politicians have become traitors to this country, in most cases they are more loyal to whichever country, lobbyist, corporation, or special interest group that will keep them in office and line their bank accounts. I’m sick of how they trample our flag and do not seek America’s interests first,” he continued.

McNaughton added, “Trump stands apart from them with his head bowed contemplating the state of our border situation. He sees a lost doll left behind by a little girl forced to make the dangerous journey. To not build the wall is to allow people on both sides of the border to suffer needlessly.”

As can be seen in the painting, McNaughton provided great detail in his representation of those who currently stand most opposed to his border security efforts, and shows by way of the flags they are holding where their interests lie, ahead of those of the American people.

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is holding the flag of communist China, while Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren holds one for the European Union. They stand beside Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who are holding a Mexican flag together.

To the other side of Pelosi and Schumer stand failed Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton with an Iranian flag and former President Obama with a United Nations flag.

In the background stands New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez with a New York flag alongside Michigan Rep. Rashida Tlaib and Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar, who hold up a Palestinian flag. California Reps. Adam Schiff and Maxine Waters can also been seen holding a California flag.

Meanwhile, a veritable horde of people are crossing through the desert toward the border in the far distance behind all of them, as the Democrats cheer about blocking Trump’s efforts to halt that flow of humanity.

President Trump made numerous efforts to reach out and negotiate with a Congress to find an agreeable solution to the ongoing crisis at the border, to no avail.

As a result of the decided lack of cooperation from Democrats, Trump finally fell back on congressionally authorized presidential powers to declare a national emergency to directly address the situation himself.

Of course, the Democrats are fighting that, too, and have refused to relent in their incessant opposition to everything done by Trump, up to and including stomping on the desires and interests of the American people who voted to elect the president that is so despised by the left.

This painting beautifully, if quite tragically, sums up the current situation in a rather stark, but necessary, manner.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Summary

More Info Recent Posts Contact

Ben Marquis is a writer who identifies as a constitutional conservative/libertarian. His focus is on protecting the First and Second Amendments. He has covered current events and politics for Conservative Tribune since 2014.

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


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Dummies

Known convicted liar, Michael Cohen’s congressional testimony sounded more like it was coming from the Clinton camp than his own words.

Lanny Davis Puppet CohenPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
See more Legal Insurrection Branco cartoons, click here.

A.F.Branco’s New Coffee Table Book <—- Order

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 seen 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, and even the great El Rushbo. Also Recently noticed and re-posted by President Trump

FBI Raids Home of Clinton Foundation, Uranium One Whistleblower


 

Reported By Richard Pollock | November 29, 2018 at 8:22pm

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/fbi-raids-home-whistleblower-clinton-foundation-uranium-one-lawyer-says-2/

Former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

Former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. (Brad Barket / Getty Images)

The Justice Department’s inspector general was informed that the documents show that federal officials failed to investigate potential criminal activity regarding former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the Clinton Foundation and Rosatom, the Russian company that purchased Uranium One, a document reviewed by The Daily Caller News Foundation alleges.

The delivered documents also show that then-FBI Director Robert Mueller failed to enforce criminal laws pertaining to Rosatom and to other Russian government entities attached to Uranium One, the document reviewed by TheDCNF alleges.

Mueller is now the special counsel investigating whether Donald Trump’s presidential campaign colluded with Russia during the 2016 election.

“The bureau raided my client to seize what he legally gave Congress about the Clinton Foundation and Uranium One,” the whistleblower’s lawyer, Michael Socarras, told TheDCNF, noting that he considered the FBI’s raid to be an “outrageous disregard” of whistleblower protections.

Sixteen agents arrived at the home of Dennis Nathan Cain, a former FBI contractor, on the morning of Nov. 19 and raided his Union Bridge, Maryland, home, Socarras told TheDCNF. The raid was permitted by a court order signed on Nov. 15 by Magistrate Judge Stephanie A. Gallagher in the U.S. District Court for Baltimore and obtained by TheDCNF.

A special agent from the FBI’s Baltimore division, who led the raid, charged that Cain possessed stolen federal property and demanded entry to his private residence, Socarras told TheDCNF.

“On Nov. 19, the FBI conducted court authorized law enforcement activity in the Union Bridge, Maryland area,” bureau spokesman Dave Fitz told TheDCNF. “At this time, we have no further comment.”

Cain informed the agent while he was still at the door that he was a recognized protected whistleblower under the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act and that Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz recognized his whistleblower status, according to Socarras. Cain further told the FBI agent the potentially damaging classified information had been properly transmitted to the Senate and House Intelligence committees as permitted under the act, Socarras said. The agent immediately directed his agents to begin a sweep of the suburban home anyway.

Frightened and intimidated, Cain promptly handed over the documents, Socarras told TheDCNF. Yet even after surrendering the information to the FBI, the agents continued to rummage through the home for six hours.

“After asking and getting my approval to do so, DOJ IG Michael Horowitz had a member of his staff physically take Mr. Cain’s classified document disclosure to the House and Senate Intelligence committees,” Socarras told TheDCNF.

“For the bureau to show up at Mr. Cain’s home suggesting that those same documents are stolen federal property, and then proceed to seize copies of the same documents after being told at the house door that he is a legally protected whistleblower who gave them to Congress, is an outrageous disregard of the law,” he continued.

Cain came across the potentially explosive information while working for an FBI contractor, Socarras told TheDCNF. Cain met with a senior member of Horowitz’s office at a church close to the White House to deliver the documents to the IG, according to Socarras. He sat in a pew with a hoodie and sunglasses, Socarras said. Cain held a double-sealed envelope containing a flash drive with the documents. The IG official met him and, without saying a word, took the pouch over Cain’s shoulder and left.

If the complaint is found credible, the law protecting whistleblowers, which covers employees of government contractors, requires the IG to share such information with the attorney general — who at the time was Jeff Sessions. The two law enforcement officials directed the documents be sent to the Senate and House Intelligence committees for their examination, according to Socarras, who said that a high-level IG official hand-delivered the documents to the two intelligence committees.

“I cannot believe the bureau informed the federal magistrate who approved the search warrant that they wanted to search the home of an FBI whistleblower to seize the information that he confidentially disclosed to the IG and Congress,” Socarras told TheDCNF.

The whistleblower act is intended to protect whistleblowers within the intelligence community, which includes the FBI.

“The (intelligence community) is committed to providing its personnel the means to report violations of law,” according to a 2016 intelligence community directive.

“The (whistleblower act) authorizes employees of contractors to take government property and give it to the two intelligence committees confidentially,” Socarras told TheDCNF.

The FBI has yet to talk to Cain’s attorney despite the raid, according to Socarras.

“After the raid, and having received my name and phone number from Mr. Cain as his lawyer, an FBI agent actually called my client directly to discuss his seized electronics,” Socarras told TheDCNF. “Knowingly bypassing the lawyer of a represented client is serious misconduct.”

A spokesman for the IG declined to comment.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

A version of this article appeared on The Daily Caller News Foundation website

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Summary
Recent Posts

Founded by Tucker Carlson, a 25-year veteran of print and broadcast media, and Neil Patel, former chief policy adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney, The Daily Caller News Foundation is a 501(c)(3) non-profit providing original investigative reporting from a team of professional reporters that operates for the public benefit.

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


A.F. Branco cartoon – Creep Show

The scariest scenario going this Halloween season among many Democrats is the possibility of Hillary running for president in 2020.

Creepy Hillary 2020Political Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.
More A.F. Branco Cartoons at The Daily Torch.

A.F.Branco Coffee Table Book <—- 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 seen 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 James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, and even the great El Rushbo.

Dick Morris: Trump’s Base Returns in Nick of Time


Opinion By Dick Morris | October 22, 2018 at 10:53am

The voters who elected Donald Trump in 2016 are returning to him just as the midterms approach. With their help, Trump has recorded his highest job approval in the WSJ/NBC poll since he took office — 47 percent.

But the real story is behind the numbers. Trump’s base — white non-college voters (38 percent of the country) is rallying to his candidates just as they did in the closing weeks of 2017. According to a Fox News poll, the only one that measures white non-college voters as a discrete group, Trump’s approval has surged among these folks.

In August 2016, his margin of approval over disapproval was only 11 points (54-43).  By September, it had risen to a 17 point margin (57-40).

In their latest poll, Oct. 13-16, it surged to a 21 point margin (60-39).

These voters are coming home.

This base lives in a place that is a blind spot for the mainstream media. It doesn’t really know that these voters exist. They live away from the West Coast and outside of the Northeast. They haven’t been to college. And they are white. The failure to measure their changing opinions is responsible for the media’s error in predicting a Hillary Clinton victory in 2016 — and they haven’t changed their methodology since.

Trump’s base hides in plain sight during the bulk of the year. Estranged from the political process, they don’t follow it closely except when their man is in danger and summons them forth. That’s why the GOP did not do as well in the special elections of the past two years as Trump had hoped. But when the national fireball rings, they wake up and respond.

The controversy over the Kavanaugh nomination and the phony stories of sexual abuse energized the sleeping giant and motivated the voters to return to the Trump banner. Since, by emphasizing the immigration issue and the caravan arriving from Central America, he has held their attention.

The national polling is slow to pick them up on its radar. While their participation and increasing enthusiasm shows up quickly in the national job approval polling, it is slower to make its impact felt in the less frequent polling of the nation’s Senate races. The House polling, less frequent still, takes even longer to manifest their participation, but they are there, moving the needle.

The views expressed in this opinion article are those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by the owner of this website.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Dick Morris is a former adviser to President Bill Clinton as well as a political author, pollster and consultant. His most recent book, “Rogue Spooks,” was written with his wife, Eileen McGann.

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


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Hindsight 2020

Hillary appears to be positioning herself for a presidential run in 2020, but her party may not be that excited about after failed attempts.

Hillary Clinton for President 2020Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.
More A.F. Branco Cartoons at The Daily Torch.

A.F.Branco Coffee Table Book <—- 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 seen 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 James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, and even the great El Rushbo.

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


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Baggage Claim

Hillary Clinton continues to appear cozy with violent left-wing mobs, and like the mainstream media, even refusing to call them mobs.

Hillary Cozy with Mob RulePolitical Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.
More A.F. Branco Cartoons at The Daily Torch.

A.F.Branco Coffee Table Book <—- 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 seen all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News” and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, and even the great El Rushbo.

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


A.F. Branco Cartoon – I’m With Them

Hillary Clinton endorses Mob Rule calling for no civility as long as the Democrats are out of power.

Hillary Clinton for Mob RulePolitical Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.
See more Legal Insurrection Branco cartoons, click here.

A.F.Branco’s New Coffee Table Book <—- Order

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 seen 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 James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, and even the great El Rushbo.

China Hacked Hillary’s Server, Got Her Emails


URL of the original posting site: http://www.con-alerts.com/china-hacked-hillarys-server-got-her-emails/

National security moves made by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration came as no surprise to China. We’re now learning that a Chinese state-owned company – aka the Chinese government – hacked Clinton’s email server and then inserted code to forward themselves a “courtesy copy” of every email she sent or received after that. Insanely enough, the code was discovered in 2015 by the Intelligence Community Inspector General who then warned the FBI officials – and agent Peter Strzok – but the FBI says it found no such compromise and the ICIG has declined to comment. There was no follow up. Any guesses why the FBI found no evidence of the hack just before the presidential election heated up?

Here’s more from Fox News…

A Chinese state-owned company reportedly hacked former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s email server, then inserted code that forwarded them a copy of virtually every email she sent or received after that — a revelation President Trump is demanding be investigated.

The Daily Caller reported that the firm operating in the D.C. area wrote code that was then embedded in the server and generated a “courtesy copy” for almost all her emails — which was then forwarded to the Chinese company.

The code reportedly was discovered in 2015 by the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG), which then warned FBI officials of the intrusion.

A source briefed on the matter confirmed to Fox News the details of the Caller’s reporting, and said that the ICIG was so concerned by the revelation that officials drove over to the FBI to inform agents — including anti-Trump agent Peter Strzok — of the development after it was discovered via the emails’ metadata.

The source told Fox News the hack was from a Chinese company, describing it as a front for Chinese intelligence.

Cohen’s plea deal is prosecutor’s attempt to set up Trump


Reported

Here we go, from Russia with love, to campaign finance with love.

Why was Michael Cohen investigated? Because the “Steele dossier” had him making secret trips to meet with Russians that never happened, so his business dealings got a thorough scrubbing and, in the process, he fell into the Paul Manafort bin reserved by the special counsel for squeezing until the juice comes out. We are back to 1998 all over again, with presidents and candidates covering up their alleged marital misdeeds and prosecutors trying to turn legal acts into illegal ones by inventing new crimes.

The plot to get President TrumpE out of office thickens, as Cohen obviously was his own mini crime syndicate and decided that his betrayals meant he would be better served turning on his old boss to cut the best deal with prosecutors he could rather than holding out and getting the full Manafort treatment. That was clear the minute he hired attorney Lanny Davis, who does not try cases and did past work for Hillary Clinton. Cohen had recorded his client, trying to entrap him, sold information about Trump to corporations for millions of dollars while acting as his lawyer, and did not pay taxes on millions.

ADVERTISEMENT

The sweetener for the prosecutors, of course, was getting Cohen to plead guilty to campaign violations that were not campaign violations. Money paid to people who come out of the woodwork and shake down people under threat of revealing bad sexual stories are not legitimate campaign expenditures. They are personal expenditures. That is true for both candidates we like and candidates we do not. Just imagine if candidates used campaign funds instead of their own money to pay folks like Stormy Daniels to keep quiet about affairs. They would get indicted for misuse of campaign funds for personal purposes and for tax evasion.

There appear to be two payments involved in this unusual agreement. Cohen pleaded guilty to a campaign violation for having “coordinated” the American Media payment to Karen McDougal for her story, not for actually making the payment. He is pleading guilty over a corporate contribution he did not make. Think about this for a minute. Suppose ABC paid Stormy Daniels for her story in coordination with Michael Avenatti or maybe even the law firm of the Democratic National Committee on the eve of the election.

By this reasoning, if the purpose of this money paid, just before the election, would be to hurt Trump and help Clinton win, this payment would be a corporate political contribution. If using it not to get Trump would be a corporate contribution, then using it to get Trump also has to be a corporate contribution. That is why neither are corporate contributions and this is a bogus approach to federal election law. Note that none of the donors in the 2012 John Edwards case faced any legal issues and the Federal Election Commission ruled their payments were not campaign contributions that had to be reported, both facts that prosecutors tried to suppress at trial.

Now, when it comes to Stormy Daniels, Cohen made a payment a few days before the election that Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani says was reimbursed. First, given that this payment was in October, it would never have been reported before the election campaign and so, for all intents and purposes, was immaterial as it relates to any effect on the campaign. What is clear in this plea deal is that, in exchange for overall leniency on his massive tax evasion, Cohen is pleading guilty to these other charges as an attempt to give prosecutors what they want, which is a Trump connection.

The usual procedures here would be for the Federal Election Commission to investigate complaints and sort through these murky laws to determine if these kinds of payments are personal in nature or more properly classified as campaign expenditures. On the Stormy Daniels payment that was made and reimbursed by Trump, it is again a question of whether that was made for personal reasons, especially since they have been trying since 2011 to obtain agreement. Just because it would be helpful to the campaign does not convert it to a campaign expenditure. Think of a candidate with bad teeth who had dental work done to look better for the campaign. His campaign still could not pay for it because it is a personal expenditure.

Contrast what is going on here with the treatment of the millions of dollars paid to a Democratic law firm which, in turn, paid out money to political research firm Fusion GPS and British spy Christopher Steele without listing them on any campaign expenditure form, despite crystal clear laws and regulations that the ultimate beneficiaries of the funds must be listed. This rule was even tightened recently. There is no question that hiring spies to do opposition research in Russia is a campaign expenditure, yet no prosecutorial raids have been sprung on the law firm, Fusion GPS or Steele. The reason? It does not “get” Trump.

So, Trump spends $130,000 to keep the lid on a personal story and the full weight of state prosecutors comes down on his lawyer, tossing attorney-client privilege to the wind. Democrats spend potentially millions on secret opposition research and no serious criminal investigation occurs. Remember that the feds tried a similar strategy against Democratic candidate Edwards six years ago and it failed. As Gregory Craig, a lawyer who worked both for President Clinton and Edwards, said, “The government theory is wrong on the facts and wrong on the law. It is novel and untested. There is no civil or criminal precedent for such a prosecution.” Tried it there anyway and it failed.

Let us also not forget that President Clinton was entrapped into lying about his affairs and, although impeached, was acquitted by the Senate. The lesson was clear: We are not going to remove presidents for lying about who they had affairs with, nor even convict politicians on campaign finance violations for these personal payments.

With Cohen pleading guilty, there will be no test of soundness of the prosecution theories here, and it is yet another example of the double standards of justice of one investigation that gave Clinton aides and principals every benefit of the doubt and another investigation that targeted Trump people until they found unrelated crimes to use as leverage. Prosecutors thought nothing of using the Logan Act against former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn, but they are using obscure and unsettled elements of campaign finance law against Trump lawyer Cohen to manufacture crimes in what is a naked attempt to take Trump down and defeat democracy.

Trump should do a better job of picking aides who pay their taxes, but he is not responsible for their financial problems and crimes. These investigations, essentially based on an opposition dossier, were never anything other than an attempt to push into a corner as many Trump aides and family members as possible and shake them down until they could get close enough to Trump to try to take him down.

That is why so many of his aides, lawyers, and actions in the campaign and in the White House have undergone hour by hour scrutiny to find anything that could be colored into a crime, leaving far behind the original Russia collusion theory as the fake pretext it was. Paying for nondisclosure agreements for perfectly legal activities is not a crime, not a campaign contribution as commonly understood or ruled upon by the Federal Election Commission. Squeezing guilty pleas out of vulnerable witnesses does nothing to change those facts.

Mark Penn is a managing partner of the Stagwell Group, a private equity firm specializing in marketing services companies, as well as chairman of the Harris Poll and author of “Microtrends Squared.” He served as pollster and adviser to President Clinton from 1995 to 2000, including during Clinton’s impeachment. You can follow him on Twitter @Mark_Penn.

Today’s Ann Coulter Letter: “The Pantsuit That Cried Wolf”


Commentary by Ann Coulter  | 

URL of the original posting site: http://humanevents.com/2018/08/23/the-pantsuit-that-cried-wolf/

If you’ve ever wondered how Russia became America’s most fearsome enemy, long after that country gave up Communism, gulags, forced starvations and mass murder (all of which liberals were cool with), the answer is: This crackpot idea came from the same woman who blamed a “vast right-wing conspiracy” for Monica Lewinsky.

The Russia conspiracy is classic Hillary, as detailed in my new book, Resistance Is Futile!: How the Trump-Hating Left Lost Its Collective Mind.

Throughout her long and blemished public career, Hillary has always blamed her troubles on bad people conspiring against her.

When her husband’s mistress, Gennifer Flowers, stepped forward as Bill Clinton was running for president in 1992, Hillary blamed a former gubernatorial opponent of her husband, who “has now spent the last two years doing everything he can to try to get even, and it’s a sort of sad spectacle.”

Bill later admitted to the affair.

When Hillary callously fired long-serving White House travel office employees to make room for her friends’ travel business, she responded to the public outcry by accusing the head of the travel office, Billy Dale, of embezzlement. To continue the charade, her husband’s government criminally prosecuted Dale. The jury acquitted him after about three minutes of deliberation, but Dale was left jobless and nearly bankrupt.

When Hillary’s health care bill went down in flames, hurting the Democrats and leading to the first Republican Congress in 40 years, she blamed the media for having “bought into the right-wing attack.” (You know how the media slavishly repeat conservative talking points.)

As mentioned above, when her husband was caught for the millionth time molesting the help, Hillary blamed a “vast right-wing conspiracy.”

When DNA proved the story was true, Hillary blamed the fuss in the media on “prejudice against our state” — meaning Arkansas. “They wouldn’t be doing this if we were from some other state,” she said. Even The San Francisco Chronicle hooted at that one.

When she lost to Obama in 2008, she blamed the media’s rampant sexism. In fact, a ham-handed liar like Hillary could only have survived in politics as long as she did thanks to the media’s devotion to her.

Quiz: When the Democratic National Committee’s emails popped up on Wikileaks in July 2016, embarrassing her campaign and enraging Democrats, would Hillary:

A) Apologize to Bernie Sanders for the DNC’s horrible mistreatment of him;

B) Demand an accounting of the inept computer security measures at the DNC;

Or

C) Invent a story about Russia conspiring against her?

Answer: C. Russia had to become the next Linda Tripp, a mysterious enemy undermining our heroine.

Hillary’s campaign manager Robby Mook launched the Russia conspiracy theory on the eve of the Democratic National Convention on ABC’s “This Week With George Stephanopoulos” — because who better to ask the tough questions than a former top aide to Hillary’s husband?

Mook explained:

“Well, what’s disturbing about this entire situation is that experts are telling us that Russian state actors broke into the DNC, took all these emails and now are leaking them out through these websites. … And it’s troubling that some experts are now telling us that this was done by — by the Russians for the purpose of helping Donald Trump.”

Stephanopoulos may not have burst out laughing, but, at the time, every serious journalist in America did. Right up until Trump drove liberals mad by winning the election, Hillary’s Russia conspiracy theory was scoffed at throughout the media.

A New York Times story described Mook’s claim as an “eerie suggestion of a Kremlin conspiracy to aid Donald Trump.” It was, the Times reporters said, a “remarkable moment.” Even at the height of the Cold War, such an accusation had never been leveled by one presidential candidate against another. And yet, the Times dryly observed, Mook had cited nothing more than unnamed “experts.”

Los Angeles Times reporter Mark Z. Barabak also pointed out the unnamed “experts” and noted that Mook’s “allegation” served two political purposes. It tainted Trump’s boast that he’d get along with Russia and “also served the added benefit, from Clinton’s perspective, of distracting from internal party divisions over the emails.”

Russian scholars and cyber-security experts dismissed the harebrained claim:

“Experts: Hard to prove Russians behind DNC hack” — USA Today

“Why the Kremlin might not be the fan of Trump that it’s said to be” — The Christian Science Monitor

A month later, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi held a conference call with nervous Democrats, urging them to push the Russian conspiracy theory and also to put out the word that “the Russians” might have altered the content of the emails.

President Obama took the alleged Russian hacking so seriously that he told Putin to “cut it out.”

It was only after disaster struck and Trump won the election that the media decided maybe there was something to that Russia business, after all.

As described in the book “Shattered: Inside Hillary Clinton’s Doomed Campaign,” two days after the election, Hillary’s communications team met for hours “to engineer the case that the election wasn’t entirely on the up-and-up. … Already, Russian hacking was the centerpiece of the argument.”

The entire Russian collusion gag was invented to assuage the potty pantsuit’s embarrassment at having lost a second election that was fixed for her to win.

In the two years since the media guffawed at Mook’s claim, the public has been presented with no new evidence. All that’s changed is that the media suddenly decided to demand that we all believe it.

Hillary Addresses Yale Grads: No Sane Parent Would Want Her Advice


Posted by Tami Jackson | on

Hillary at Yale 2

As an esteemed and über expensive Ivy League school, Yale draws media attention and carries weight with all the Fortune 500 companies.

Like its seven fellow Ivies, Yale was founded as “an institution to train ministers and lay leadership.” Yep. Yale was the school expected to churn out pastors and congregants well versed in the Bible and biblical theology.

Sounds like science fiction! Today the Ivies churn out almost 100% hardcore Progressive radicals.

So it would be pretty true to say Yale and most of the Ivy League colleges have literally gone to hell. No kidding.

And of course if you’re Yale and you want to invite a fantastic commencement speaker who do you ask?

Easy.

Ask the 2009 highly esteemed Margaret Sanger Award Recipient, the ardent champion of abortion, the woman renowned for selling 20% of our strategic uranium to Russia, the dame who eviscerated very women preyed upon by her infamous philanderer hubby, the presidential candidate who not only lost the election, but has since trotted the globe making excuses for her epic loss.

Yes. Of course. Ask Hill the Pill Clinton to speak!

All those impressionable young graduates can soak up the Rules for Radicals she learned at the feet of Commie Agitator Saul Alinsky!

Think of it: on top of shelling out almost $50K per year for tuition to have their little darlings propagandized with the most extreme leftist ideology, parents this year had the added bonus of words to live by from Madame HRC herself.

So what did these oh-so-very-lucky parents get for their cool $200K, commencement speaker-wise?

Ms. Clinton (who thankfully had a commencement gown over her traditional pantsuit) chortled through the story of why she chose Yale over Harvard:

Now to be honest [what? are you ever honest?] I had had some trouble making up my mind between Yale and Harvard law schools. Then one day, while we were still in that period of decision making, I was invited to a cocktail party at Harvard for potentially incoming [“INCOMING!” an apt term for the arrival of HRC] law students, where I met a famous law professor.

A friend of mine, a male law student, introduced me to this famous law professor. I mean truly…big three-piece suit, watch-chain.

And my friend said, “Professor, this is Hillary Rodham. She’s trying to decide whether to come here next year or sign up with our closest competitor.”

Now the great man gave me a cool dismissive look [you would know that look, Hill, you’ve perfected it] and said, “Well, first of all we don’t have any close competitors. and secondly, we don’t need any more women at Harvard.”

To which Hillary replied, “Well do you need any cackling witches? (or a word that rhymes with that)”

Actually I made that up. Just kidding. But it sure seemed true to character!

Next Hill regaled the grads with the story of meeting her future husband, William Jefferson Clinton:

I confess, of all the formative experiences that I had at Yale, perhaps none was more significant than the day during my second year when I was cutting through what was then the student lounge with some friends and I saw this tall handsome guy with a beard who looked like a Viking [NO! DON’T disparage all of us Vikings by assigning the nefarious Bubba to our Nordic bloodlines!].

I said to my friend, “Who is that?”

And she said, “That’s Bill Clinton. He’s from Arkansas and that’s all he ever talks about!

Yadda yadda. Just what we never wanted to hear: the Hill and Bill love story, a match not made in heaven, but someplace farther south and scorching hot.

The former FLOTUS also noted an oddly ironic tale:

One day I saw a note about a woman named Marian Wright Edelman a Yale Law School graduate, civil rights activist, who would go on to found the Children’s Defense Fund. Marion was coming back to campus to give a lecture.

I went. I was captivated to hear her talk about using her Yale education to create a head-start program in rural Mississippi. And I wound up working for her that summer.

And the experience opened my eyes to the ways that the law can protect children.

Does that strike you as odd?

Children? As in those little humans that begin life in a supposed safe zone, i.e. the womb?

The proud recipient of the Margaret Sanger Award — Sanger being the loathsome eugenicist who founded Planned Parenthood (the organization responsible for the killing of 7.6 million babies since Roe v. Wade — that sure sounds like genocide!) — that same woman wants these grads to believe she is a compassionate grandmother who loves “all the little children of the world.”

Sorry. Can’t swallow that. Jesus loves the little children. Hillary, not so much.

Well, HRC loves the children if they grow up to vote for her. Maybe love is too strong a word, too foreign a word for HRH Misses Clinton? Tolerate might be a more apt word.

The moral of this story?

Nearly every graduate was enraptured by the Queen of Excuses, smiling and laughing at every phrase as though listening to a Mark Twain or Garrison Keillor…oops. Strike the Keillor. Too Bill-like.

You get the point.

Four years of liberal elitist education thoroughly transformed these Yale students into brain-dead Leftist lemmings who hung on Hillary’s every word.

God help us.

And God have mercy on the parents who chose to throw nearly a quarter of a million dollars at a once stellar institution that would invite one-half of the Clinton Deadly Duo to speak at commencement. Thus, sending the grads on their way with her words of wisdom…perverse vanity.

Oh how the Ivies have fallen!

#EpicIvyFail

Clinton Insider: To Keep Hillary from Losing, DNC Quietly Let Russia Hack DNC, Steal Data


Reported By Cillian Zeal | July 16, 2018 at 7:35am

I’ve often heard conspiracy theories bandied about, mostly on the more feverish corners of the internet, that the Clinton family has ways to get those who would talk ill about them to, um, stop talking. I personally don’t buy into these theories, if for no other reason than that Donna Brazile is still hale, hearty and still hurting the Clintons.

Brazile, astute readers will remember, was the former Clinton insider and interim DNC head after Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz resigned in the summer of 2016 for, well, reasons. Brazile also shepherded Hillary and her party through through the election. And, when Disasterfest: 2016 was over, Brazile turned around threw Clinton not so much under the bus as under every departure from the Washington, D.C., Greyhound depot.

First, there was an excerpt last year from her then-forthcoming book “Hacks” that let everyone know that the entire apparatus of the DNC was backing Clinton in order to help quash Bernie Sanders’ insurgent campaign. That was bad enough.

TRENDING: Dem Panic: Page May Seek Immunity Deal To Come Clean on Strzok, McCabe, Even Comey

That book, released in November, continues to haunt Clinton. Just last week, 12 Russians were indicted for breaking into the DNC’s servers in order to steal email, including Hillary Clinton’s. Yet, according to “Hacks,” the DNC knew it was being hacked but kept its servers up anyway because it didn’t want to disrupt the primary process.

“In May, when CrowdStrike recommended that we take down our system and rebuild it, the DNC told them to wait a month, because the state primaries for the presidential election were still underway, and the party and the staff needed to be at their computers to manage these efforts,” Brazile wrote, according to The Daily Caller.

“For a whole month, CrowdStrike watched Cozy Bear and Fancy Bear operating. Cozy Bear was the hacking force that had been in the DNC system for nearly a year.”

Both Cozy Bear and Fancy Bear were cyber-security firms with extensive ties to Vladimir Putin’s Russia.

Brazile wasn’t at the helm during this period; the primaries ended in June and Wasserman Schultz was still the chairwoman of the DNC until July, when she resigned over the hacks. In other words, top Democrats had been given due warning about being hacked and continued to use the servers for roughly a month or two.

This was all to keep the primaries running apace — and given that this was the DNC, the organization that Brazile has openly admitted did everything in its power to keep Bernie Sanders from winning, it was done so that Hillary Clinton didn’t suffer any more embarrassing primary defeats.

Now, we don’t know what data was stolen between May and June that wouldn’t have been had the servers been disassembled. For all we know, the Russians had everything they needed by the time they were even discovered inside the system. We’ll certainly learn more about that in the coming months.

Or perhaps not: The United States, pursuant to constitutional considerations, doesn’t practice trial in absentia if defendants aren’t available at the beginning of the process. And it seems unlikely Moscow is going to turn over anyone indicted last week.

However, what we do know from Brazile’s book — inasmuch as it can be trusted, given that these sorts of books are given over to self-acquittal and glorification — is that the DNC was flagrantly bad about protecting its data and that it was compromised by foreign actors. We also know that it was used as a de facto arm of the Clinton campaign before she was even nominated.

And now we know how bad things were at the DNC, thanks to Donna Brazile.

Just saying.

Terror Expert on What He Saw Going into Summit: Media Is Completely Off-Base


Reported By Ben Marquis | July 17, 2018 at 12:28pm

There was great consternation and outrage among the media and Democrats — as well as some Republicans — following President Donald Trump’s summit in Helsinki, Finland, with Russian President Vladimir Putin. While the harsh criticisms and shouts of “treason” from the hard left and NeverTrump right are more than a little disconcerting, they are not the least bit surprising as that sort of reaction has become rather predictable in this day and age.

Indeed, the stage was set ahead of the summit for just such a reaction by the media and Democrats, who displayed their “glaring hypocrisy” with regard to their coverage of Trump’s diplomatic meeting as opposed to the diplomatic meetings held by former President Barack Obama or former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

That was the message delivered on “Fox & Friends” on Sunday morning by former U.S. Army Special Forces member and anti-terrorism expert Jim Hanson, who pointed out the disparate ways in which Trump, Obama and Clinton were treated by the establishment and media following their particular dealings with Russia.

Co-host Pete Hegseth began the segment by recalling Clinton’s embarrassing attempt in 2009 to hit the “reset” button with Russia, using a hokey red plastic button that actually had the wrong Russian word printed on it to symbolize the development in U.S./Russian relations.

“And Hillary walks into that meeting asking for nothing with her giant button that actually said ‘overcharge’ in Russian, and she’s telling them, ‘ok, you can have whatever you want from us,’” Hanson said.

“Even a more glaring example was when President Obama was talking to (then-President) Medvedev of the Russian Republic and tells him, ‘after my next election I’ll have more flexibility,‘” he continued.

“Now that is him admitting that he was lying to the American public during that election cycle, and afterwards he would give Russia what they wanted. But yet, where is the outrage? Where is the press saying we should investigate that?” Hanson asked.

Hegseth asked what sort of “flexibility” Obama was referring to in that particular remark, and if it meant allowing Russia to annex Crimea, invade Ukraine or even meddle in our elections.

“All of it, and that’s the problem Pete,” Hanson replied. “You know the entire focus and entire stature of the Obama foreign policy was cringing capitulation, it was ‘America last’ — ‘what do you guys want, what can we give you’ — and it ended up making the world a much more dangerous place.”

“In that case they were actually talking about missile defense, so the security of the entire free world for any attack by any crazed person with missiles — which could have included the Russians — is being put at risk because Obama was willing to go ahead and bow down,” Hanson said.

“And now, the media at that point in time had nothing to say, now President Trump wants to have a less antagonistic relationship with the Russians, maybe get them to stop hurting us with North Korea, stop hurting us in Syria, and all of the sudden it’s the worst thing that ever happened,” he continued.

“It’s glaring hypocrisy,” Hanson concluded, to which Hegseth could only reply, “Absolutely it is, every single day of the week.”

When Obama and Clinton reached out and tried to make nice with Russia, they were applauded by the liberal media and establishment politicians on both sides of the aisle, even as Putin and Russia took full advantage of the naïve good faith extended by Obama and Clinton.

Now Trump is seeking to tone down the harsh rhetoric and smooth out the rough relationship between the U.S. and Russia and he has been attacked and smeared as some sort of Putin puppet that has sold out his own nation by the same folks who cheered similar efforts by Trump’s predecessors.

If that isn’t glaring hypocrisy, nothing is.

KARMA: After Hillary Attacked Trump Border Policy & Said He’s Torturing Kids, She Got an EPIC Dose of Karma


Reported by 

URL of the original posting site: http://www.americanjournalreview.com/hillary-attack-trump-border-policy/

Hillary Clinton recently attacked President Trump for his new “zero tolerance” policy. 

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says the Trump administration is separating children from their parents at the southern U.S. border and it is a “moral and humanitarian crisis.” President Trump has defended his new immigration policy, which has separated almost 2,000 immigrant children away from their parents at the U.S.-Mexico border. There have been accounts of children being kept in cages and parents not sure where their children are. 

The separation policy has come under increasingly strong criticism from the left. Hillary Clinton says she warned America during the campaign that this type of situation would happen. However, what people forget to remember is that Hillary ranted about needing to deport immigrant children back in 2014… Now that Trump is president, her entire opinion has changed. 

Reported by subjectpolitics:

Hillary Clinton has joined other liberals the past few days in bashing President Trump for the crisis at the border.  She said,  “every human being with a sense of compassion and decency, should be outraged,” and claimed Trump is “letting children suffer.”

This comes after spending the last 2 years calling Pres. Trump and his supporters “Racist” or “xenophobic” for wanting to enforce immigration laws.

But a video just surfaced that shows how empty Hillary’s words are and exposes her as the vile hypocrite she truly is.

While promoting her book on CNN in 2014, Hillary was asked whether or not children who arrive at our border should be deported or allowed to stay.

Watch this clip then spread it everywhere so we can expose her.

Hillary RANTS about how we have to deport them and “send a clear message” that just because children show up here “doesn’t mean the child gets to stay.” While this is a reasonable opinion shared by most Americans, Hillary Clinton in 2018 would now say that statement is racist.

https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fnumbersusa%2Fvideos%2F1886936001363086%2F&show_text=0&width=476

“We have to send a clear message. Just because your child gets across the border, that doesn’t mean that child gets to stay.” – Hillary Clinton in 2014

So what changed??  Hmm…

Oh, right. Trump is President so she has to change her opinion completely and blame him for everything.  Liberal playbook 101.

These are some of her tweets from the past few days. Does she not realize we there is video of her previous statements??

Comey Disaster: Agent Who Quit Over Rigged Hillary Investigation Heads to Congress


disclaimerReported By Cillian Zeal | May 25, 2018 at 6:50am

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/comey-disaster-agent-who-quit-over-rigged-hillary-investigation-heads-to-congress/

An FBI agent who allegedly quit the bureau over his belief that the Hillary Clinton email investigation was rigged will testify before the House of Representatives, The Hill reported.

The joint investigation between the House Judiciary and the Oversight Committees — led by Republican Reps. Bob Goodlatte of Virginia and Trey Gowdy of South Carolina, respectively — has been a source of consternation for Republicans and Democrats alike.

Conservatives have complained about the slow pace of the examination into how the Clinton email investigation was conducted, noting that only two witnesses have appeared before it.

Democrats, of course, have complained that it exists at all, since anything that distracts from the endless investigation into how President Donald Trump is really a Russian plant is simply frivolous — particularly if it implicates former FBI Director James Comey, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton or former President Barack Obama in any wrongdoing.

Well, now we’re finally about to see some fireworks. Three top witnesses are going to testify before lawmakers: John Giacalone, who was in charge of the Clinton investigation for the first seven months; Bill Priestap, assistant director of the FBI’s counterintelligence division; and Michael Steinbach, former head of the FBI’s national security division and the man who succeeded Giacalone.

All three are of particular interest, especially since Priestap was the supervisor of FBI agent Peter Strzok, whose anti-Trump text messages have thrown the objectivity of the entire investigation into doubt.

However, the real headliner here may be Giacalone. Shortly after then-FBI Director Comey announced he wouldn’t be pursuing charges against Hillary Clinton for the email server, Fox News pundit Judge Andrew Napolitano wrote a column in which he claimed Giacalone had quit the bureau because he believed the investigation was rigged.

In the Oct. 28, 2016 column, Napolitano claimed at that at the start of the Clinton email investigation, “agents and senior managers gathered in the summer of 2015 to discuss how to proceed. It was obvious to all that a prima-facie case could be made for espionage, theft of government property and obstruction of justice charges. The consensus was to proceed with a formal criminal investigation.” 

“Six months later, the senior FBI agent in charge of that investigation resigned from the case and retired from the FBI because he felt the case was going ‘sideways’; that’s law enforcement jargon for ‘nowhere by design,‘” Napolitano wrote.

“John Giacalone had been the chief of the New York City, Philadelphia and Washington, D.C., field offices of the FBI and, at the time of his ‘sideways’ comment, was the chief of the FBI National Security Branch.”

“The reason for the ‘sideways’ comment must have been Giacalone’s realization that DOJ and FBI senior management had decided that the investigation would not work in tandem with a federal grand jury. That is nearly fatal to any government criminal case. In criminal cases, the FBI and the DOJ cannot issue subpoenas for testimony or for tangible things; only grand juries can,” Napolitano continued.

“Giacalone knew that without a grand jury, the FBI would be toothless, as it would have no subpoena power. He also knew that without a grand jury, the FBI would have a hard time persuading any federal judge to issue search warrants.”

Napolitano speculated there were several possible reasons that the case went “sideways.” One was that Obama feared having to testify if Clinton went to trial (he had sent emails to the private server, after all, meaning he was aware of it). There was also the fact that a Clinton indictment could have led to Trump becoming president, and Obama simply couldn’t countenance that. (Less than two weeks after Napolitano’s column was written, it must be noted, that reason became moot.)

Either way, if the investigation had indeed gone “sideways,” it would need to have done so with approval from the highest levels — certainly James Comey and possibly Barack Obama.like i said

Whether or not Giacalone has any concrete evidence of this or not is another issue entirely. My guess would be no, given that we’re going on two years since Comey’s infamous news conference and we still haven’t heard anything to that effect from Giacalone.

However, of all of the congressional testimonies we’ve seen over the past few years, this could be one of the most underreported. John Giacalone may open up a gigantic can of worms for Comey and Clinton — one that drags them back in the spotlight for reasons significantly less pleasant than their book tours.

please likeand share and leave a comment

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


Never-Ever-Trumper

According to Nancy Pelosi Trump is never right even when he is and is damned if he does or damned if he doesn’t.

Pelosi Trump and Korea

Political Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.

See more Conservative Daily News cartoons here

A.F.Branco Coffee Table Book <—- 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 seen all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News” and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, and even the great El Rushbo.

The Mad Hatter

Hillary Clinton, while speaking at Yale, presents her very own Russian Hat. who did she have to collude with to get that?

Hillary Clinton’s Russian Hat

Political Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.

More A.F. Branco Cartoons at The Daily Torch.

A.F.Branco Coffee Table Book <—- 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 seen 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 James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, and even the great El Rushbo.

MORE Politically INCORRECT Cartoons for May 23, 2018


according to hillaryall i can hear is russia collusionbad faith offerdropoutfb spyfishing troublehillarys russia hathope its not a volcanoI am NOT a spyindy 100leftist pelosi value of life double speakms13 animalsparty animalssocialism magmastarboxtrouble understanding englishtrump deplomacyvenezuel socialist idea of changewhat messageplease likeand share and leave a comment

Mueller may have a conflict — and it leads directly to a Russian oligarch


Special counsel Robert Mueller has withstood relentless political attacks, many distorting his record of distinguished government service. But there’s one episode even Mueller’s former law enforcement comrades — and independent ethicists — acknowledge raises legitimate legal issues and a possible conflict of interest in his overseeing the Russia election probe.

In 2009, when Mueller ran the FBI, the bureau asked Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska to spend millions of his own dollars funding an FBI-supervised operation to rescue a retired FBI agent, Robert Levinson, captured in Iran while working for the CIA in 2007.

Yes, that’s the same Deripaska who has surfaced in Mueller’s current investigation and who was recently sanctioned by the Trump administration.

The Levinson mission is confirmed by more than a dozen participants inside and outside the FBI, including Deripaska, his lawyer, the Levinson family and a retired agent who supervised the case. Mueller was kept apprised of the operation, officials told me.

Some aspects of Deripaska’s help were chronicled in a 2016 book by reporter Barry Meier, but sources provide extensive new information about his role. They said FBI agents courted Deripaska in 2009 in a series of secret hotel meetings in Paris; Vienna; Budapest, Hungary, and Washington. Agents persuaded the aluminum industry magnate to underwrite the mission. The Russian billionaire insisted the operation neither involve nor harm his homeland.

“We knew he was paying for his team helping us, and that probably ran into the millions,” a U.S. official involved in the operation confirmed.

One agent who helped court Deripaska was Andrew McCabe, the recently fired FBI deputy director who played a seminal role starting the Trump-Russia case, multiple sources confirmed.

Deripaska’s lawyer said the Russian ultimately spent $25 million assembling a private search and rescue team that worked with Iranian contacts under the FBI’s watchful eye. Photos and videos indicating Levinson was alive were uncovered.

Then in fall 2010, the operation secured an offer to free Levinson. The deal was scuttled, however, when the State Department become uncomfortable with Iran’s terms, according to Deripaska’s lawyer and the Levinson family.

FBI officials confirmed State hampered their efforts.

“We tried to turn over every stone we could to rescue Bob, but every time we started to get close, the State Department seemed to always get in the way,” said Robyn Gritz, the retired agent who supervised the Levinson case in 2009, when Deripaska first cooperated, but who left for another position in 2010 before the Iranian offer arrived. “I kept Director Mueller and Deputy Director [John] Pistole informed of the various efforts and operations, and they offered to intervene with State, if necessary.”

FBI officials ended the operation in 2011, concerned that Deripaska’s Iranian contacts couldn’t deliver with all the U.S. infighting. Levinson was never found; his whereabouts remain a mystery, 11 years after he disappeared.

“Deripaska’s efforts came very close to success,” said David McGee, a former federal prosecutor who represents Levinson’s family. “We were told at one point that the terms of Levinson’s release had been agreed to by Iran and the U.S. and included a statement by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pointing a finger away from Iran. At the last minute, Secretary Clinton decided not to make the agreed-on statement.”

The State Department declined comment, and a spokesman for Clinton did not offer comment. Mueller’s spokesman, Peter Carr, declined to answer questions. As did McCabe.

The FBI had three reasons for choosing Deripaska for a mission worthy of a spy novel.

  • First, his aluminum empire had business in Iran.
  • Second, the FBI wanted a foreigner to fund the operation because spending money in Iran might violate U.S. sanctions and other laws.
  • Third, agents knew Deripaska had been banished since 2006 from the United States by State over reports he had ties to organized crime and other nefarious activities. He denies the allegations, and nothing was ever proven in court.like i said

The FBI rewarded Deripaska for his help. In fall 2009, according to U.S. entry records, Deripaska visited Washington on a rare law enforcement parole visa. And since 2011, he has been granted entry at least eight times on a diplomatic passport, even though he doesn’t work for the Russian Foreign Ministry.

Former FBI officials confirm they arranged the access.

Deripaska said in a statement through Adam Waldman, his American lawyer, that FBI agents told him State’s reasons for blocking his U.S. visa were “merely a pretext.”

“The FBI said they had undertaken a careful background check, and if there was any validity to the State Department smears, they would not have reached out to me for assistance,” the Russian said.

Then, over the past two years, evidence emerged tying him to former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, the first defendant charged by Mueller’s Russia probe with money laundering and illegal lobbying. Deripaska once hired Manafort as a political adviser and invested money with him in a business venture that went bad. Deripaska sued Manafort, alleging he stole money.

Mueller’s indictment of Manafort makes no mention of Deripaska, even though prosecutors have evidence that Manafort contemplated inviting his old Russian client for a 2016 Trump campaign briefing. Deripaska said he never got the invite and investigators have found no evidence it occurred. There’s no public evidence Deripaska had anything to do with election meddling.

Deripaska also appears to be one of the first Russians the FBI asked for help when it began investigating the now-infamous Fusion GPS “Steele Dossier.” Waldman, his American lawyer until the sanctions hit, gave me a detailed account, some of which U.S. officials confirm separately.

Two months before Trump was elected president, Deripaska was in New York as part of Russia’s United Nations delegation when three FBI agents awakened him in his home; at least one agent had worked with Deripaska on the aborted effort to rescue Levinson. During an hour-long visit, the agents posited a theory that Trump’s campaign was secretly colluding with Russia to hijack the U.S. election.

“Deripaska laughed but realized, despite the joviality, that they were serious,” the lawyer said. “So he told them in his informed opinion the idea they were proposing was false. ‘You are trying to create something out of nothing,’ he told them.” The agents left though the FBI sought more information in 2017 from the Russian, sources tell me. Waldman declined to say if Deripaska has been in contact with the FBI since Sept, 2016.

So why care about some banished Russian oligarch’s account now?

Two reasons.

  • First, as the FBI prepared to get authority to surveil figures on Trump’s campaign team, did it disclose to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that one of its past Russian sources waived them off the notion of Trump-Russia collusion? 
  • Second, the U.S. government in April imposed sanctions on Deripaska, one of several prominent Russians targeted to punish Vladimir Putin — using the same sort of allegations that State used from 2006 to 2009. Yet, between those two episodes, Deripaska seemed good enough for the FBI to ask him to fund that multimillion-dollar rescue mission. And to seek his help on a sensitive political investigation. And to allow him into the country eight times.

I was alerted to Deripaska’s past FBI relationship by U.S. officials who wondered whether the Russian’s conspicuous absence from Mueller’s indictments might be related to his FBI work.

They aren’t the only ones.

Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz told me he believes Mueller has a conflict of interest because his FBI previously accepted financial help from a Russian that is, at the very least, a witness in the current probe.

“The real question becomes whether it was proper to leave [Deripaska] out of the Manafort indictment, and whether that omission was to avoid the kind of transparency that is really required by the law,” Dershowitz said.

Melanie Sloan, a former Clinton Justice Department lawyer and longtime ethics watchdog, told me a “far more significant issue” is whether the earlier FBI operation was even legal: “It’s possible the bureau’s arrangement with Mr. Deripaska violated the Antideficiency Act, which prohibits the government from accepting voluntary services.”  

George Washington University constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley agreed: “If the operation with Deripaska contravened federal law, this figure could be viewed as a potential embarrassment for Mueller. The question is whether he could implicate Mueller in an impropriety.”

Now that sources have unmasked the Deripaska story, time will tell whether the courts, Justice, Congress or a defendant formally questions if Mueller is conflicted. In the meantime, the episode highlights an oft-forgotten truism: The cat-and-mouse maneuvers between Moscow and Washington are often portrayed in black-and-white terms. But the truth is, the relationship is enveloped in many shades of gray.

John Solomon is an award-winning investigative journalist whose work over the years has exposed U.S. and FBI intelligence failures before the Sept. 11 attacks, federal scientists’ misuse of foster children and veterans in drug experiments, and numerous cases of political corruption. He is The Hill’s executive vice president for video.

[Editor’s note: This post was updated at 8:10 p.m. on May 14, 2018.]

please likeand share and leave a comment

Bombshell: 2nd Russia Dossier Exists, Author’s ID Changes Everything


Reported By Chuck Ross | May 2, 2018 at 6:51am

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/bombshell-2nd-russia-dossier-exists-authors-id-changes-everything/

Clinton operatives pushed a dossier during the 2016 presidential campaign that appeared to be a classic “rope-a-dope” scheme being peddled by purported Russian spies, according to a person who was briefed on the documents by one of the Clinton insiders during the campaign. The dossier in question was written by Cody Shearer, a notorious Clinton fixer. It was passed to the Department of State by Sidney Blumenthal, a friend of Shearer’s and another Clinton operative.

The eight-page document eventually made its way to the FBI through Christopher Steele, the former British spy who wrote a dossier of his own. While the FBI is reportedly investigating the claims made in the Shearer memos, one person who discussed the document with Shearer during the campaign says it appeared at the time to be a ruse.

According to the source, who spoke to The Daily Caller News Foundation on condition of anonymity, Shearer claimed that members of Russia’s spy service, the FSB, had video tape of Trump engaged in sexually compromising acts. That allegation was similar to the one contained in Steele’s dossier, which was funded by the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee. Steele, a former MI6 officer, cited a source who said that the Kremlin has video of Trump in a Moscow hotel room in 2013 with prostitutes. The Russian government was blackmailing Trump with the footage, Steele alleged.

Shearer said he did not have the supposed tapes, TheDCNF’s source said, adding that Shearer’s situation sounded like a “rope-a-dope story where the FSB throws this stuff out there, sucks people in, tries to get money.”

A U.S. government official who was briefed on the Shearer memos in Aug. 2016 — though not by Shearer — told TheDCNF that the allegations were not taken seriously because Shearer was “not a guy with a whole lot of credibility.”

“The whole thing stinks,” recalled the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the Russia investigation.

The official said that Shearer’s effort showed that Clinton loyalists were “doing their best to get this stuff out into the mainstream media before the election.”

Shearer’s memos have received little media attention since their existence was revealed in January. The Guardian broke the story that the documents had been passed to the FBI through Steele and that the bureau was attempting to ascertain their accuracy. Steele reportedly told the FBI that the information came ultimately from Shearer.

Shearer first gained notoriety in 1991 when he was involved in spreading the false claim that then-Vice President Dan Quayle purchased drugs from Brett Kimberlin, a drug dealer who was the culprit behind the Speedway bombings. It turned out that Kimberlin made up the story about Quayle. He is now a left-wing political activist.

Shearer, whose brother-in-law is Brookings Institutions President Strobe Talbott, was also reportedly investigated by the State Department’s inspector general in the late 1990s for allegedly misrepresenting himself as State Department official during negotiations with associates of a Bosnian warlord. Shearer was reportedly paid at least $25,000 in exchange for helping the warlord.

New details of Shearer’s memos emerged on Thursday with a report from Real Clear Investigations.

Journalist Lee Smith reported that Shearer created two four-page reports entitled “Donald Trump — Background Notes — The Compromised Candidate” and “FSB Interview,” a reference to the Russian spy agency.

Shearer wrote that he relied on information from an unnamed Turkish businessman who claimed to have “excellent contacts within the FSB.” The businessman said the FSB source knew of a “cut out” between the Trump campaign and Russian President Vladimir Putin. The Trump campaign was “also involved hacking his opponents and trying to alter votes on election day,” Shearer’s source claimed.

Shearer wrote that his FSB source said that the spy agency knew of Trump’s predilection for women and used it against him.

“From observing Trump for years in previous visits to Moscow, the FSB knew he had a weakness for women,” reads the Shearer memo, according to Real Clear Investigations.

Trump was also aware that the Kremlin had compromising material on him.

Copies of the video were in Bulgaria, Israel and in vaults in Moscow, Shearer’s source said.

Shearer’s memos wove a twisted path to the FBI, with Blumenthal being the initial conduit.

In summer 2016, Blumenthal shared Shearer’s documents with a friend, a State Department official named Jonathan Winer. At the time, he was serving as special envoy to Libya, provided the Shearer reports to Steele, who he had known since 2009. Steele gave the Shearer reports to the FBI. The London-based Steele first contacted the bureau in July 2016 to share his information on Trump. He continued meeting with investigators through that October. Steele provided information from his own dossier to Winer. Winer wrote a two-page memo summarizing Steele’s allegations and passed them up the chain of command at the State Department. Sec. of State John Kerry ultimately decided that the dossier information should be shared with the FBI.

According to Lee Smith, the Real Clear Investigations reporter, Shearer’s memos also detail conversations he had with two journalists who heard rumors about Trump’s activities in Moscow. Both of the journalists, ABC News’ Brian Ross and The Wall Street Journal’s Alan Cullison, had been in contact with Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm that hired Steele. According to Shearer, Ross said that he would report on the story if he would “fly to Moscow to tape and air for broadcast,” which he would do if he could find a “talking head source” to back up Shearer’s claims. While Ross did not secure the explosive interview he sought, he did interview Sergei Millian, a Belarus-born businessman who is alleged to be “Source D,” the dossier’s main source for the Moscow hotel room allegation.

The recent book “Russian Roulette” suggests that Ross learned about Millian from Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson. Simpson hired Steele in June 2016 to investigate Trump’s activities in Russia.

“For Simpson, Millian was now an investigative target. He tipped off ABC News, which conducted an on-air interview with Millian, in which he said Trump ‘likes Russia, because he likes beautiful ladies — talking to them, of course,’” write Michael Isikoff and David Corn, the authors of “Russian Roulette.” Corn is the Washington bureau chief of the left-wing Mother Jones magazine.

Millian’s alleged involvement as a source for the dossier has raised questions about the veracity of the document. Former business associates of Millian have claimed that he has embellished his business achievements and connections. According to “Russian Roulette,” Fusion GPS’s Simpson was concerned that Millian was a source for Steele.

“Simpson had his doubts. He considered Millian a big talker,” the book reads.

Cullison, a former Moscow correspondent for The Wall Street Journal, was one of the three reporters who broke the Jan. 11, 2017 story revealing that Steele was the author of the dossier. According to Real Clear Investigations, Shearer claimed in his memo that Cullison told him that the DNC was paying Fusion GPS to corroborate the story about Trump’s Moscow visit. The Wall Street Journal has denied that Cullison knew who hired Fusion GPS. But as Lee Smith notes in his report at Real Clear Investigations, even if Cullison did not know that the DNC had hired Fusion GPS, Shearer clearly had that information.

It remains unclear how Shearer knew that the DNC was involved with Fusion GPS and how he happened to speak with two reporters who were in contact with the opposition research firm.

Shearer’s memos show he also spoke to Robert Baer, a former CIA operative who currently works for CNN. Shearer said that Baer claimed that “the Russians had established an encrypted communication system” between the Trump campaign and Russian president Vladimir Putin.

Baer told Real Clear Investigations that he picked up that story “from acquaintances at The New York Times who were trying to run the story down.” He recalled speaking with Shearer in March or April 2016. As Smith notes, if that timeline is accurate, Shearer was investigating the salacious Trump claims at around the time that Fusion GPS was hired by the Clinton campaign and DNC.

Shearer has refused to provide comment to TheDCNF.

A version of this article previously appeared on The Daily Caller News Foundation website.

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


A Mountain of Evidence

A desperate DNC, as a last resort is suing the Trump campaign, The Russians, and Wikileaks for allegedly hacking their computers and servers. What servers?

DNC Lawsuit Against TrumpPolitical Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.

Republicans Have A Plan For 2018 — It’s Terrible News For Hillary Clinton


Reported by Justin Caruso | Media Reporter | 10:22 AM 04/23/2018

The Republican plan for the 2018 midterms is not good news for failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Fox News reports that Hillary is “starring” in their strategy.

“We’re going to make them own her,” Republican National Committee spokesman Rick Gorka told Fox News.

Republicans are planning to marry Democrats to Hillary Clinton and force the party to be associated with their failed nominee.

“I promise you that you’ll continue to see it — Hillary Clinton starring in our paid media. She’s a very powerful motivator,” Corry Bliss of the Congressional Leadership Fund super PAC told Fox News. “It’s about what she represents. What she represents, just like what Nancy Pelosi represents, is out-of-touch far-left liberal positions.”

Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton speaks onstage at the Women of the World Summit on April 13, 2018 in New York City. (Photo: ANGELA WEISS/AFP/Getty Images)

In a huge contrast to how Mitt Romney treated Barack Obama after the 2012 election, Hillary has refused to leave the public eye.

Last month, Clinton smeared many Trump supporters as racists and sexists during a talk.

“I won the places that are optimistic, diverse, dynamic, moving forward, and his whole campaign ‘Make America Great Again’ was looking backwards,” she claimed. “‘You know, you didn’t like black people getting rights, you don’t like women, you know, getting jobs, you don’t want to, you know, see that Indian-Americans are succeeding more than you are — whatever your problem is, I’m going to solve it.”

Follow Justin on Twitter

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


A Higher Resistance

On The View promoting his book “A Higher Loyalty”, James Comey said that he didn’t leave the Republican party, the Republican party left him.

Talk of Comey Obstruction of Justice Begins Within Hours of First TV Interviews


Reported By Jack Davis | April 16, 2018 at 6:53am

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/talk-of-comey-obstruction-of-justice-begins-within-hours-of-first-tv-interviews/

James Comey’s efforts to promote his book has reopened calls for the fired FBI director to be investigated for obstruction of justice in his handling of the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails.

In July 2016, Comey announced that after a months-long investigation, the bureau would not charge Clinton for using a private email server during her time as former President Barack Obama’s secretary of state. That controversial decision came back to haunt him this weekend as Comey was making the rounds on the talk show circuit to promote a book that slams President Donald Trump, who fired Comey last year.

“The evidence against Hillary Clinton was powerful, overwhelming evidence under a variety of statutes that she broke the law. And if James Comey cleared her for political reasons, that’s obstruction of justice,” Fox News legal analyst Greg Jarrett said Sunday night.

Jarrett laid out the facts in an Op-Ed posted on Fox News last year, when word surfaced that Comey had begun drafting the document that exonerated Clinton long before the investigation was complete.

“Comey must now testify under oath to explain why he would write a statement of exoneration well before all the facts were known and why he would change the language to clear Clinton in the face of incriminating evidence that she mishandled classified material through gross negligence,” Jarrett wrote.

“Did Comey seek to absolve Clinton for political reasons? Was he pressured to do so by Attorney General Loretta Lynch or others? And why exactly did he take it upon himself to usurp the authority of the Justice Department in clearing Clinton?” he added.

Former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, whose 2016 tarmac meeting with former President Bill Clinton has been cited in the past by Comey as a fact that worried him as the investigation neared its end, used Comey’s book tour to put distance between herself and the former FBI chief. Comey never shared any concerns about the Clinton probe at the time it was going on, according to a statement she released, Axios reported.

“Throughout his time as Director we spoke regularly about some of the most sensitive issues in law enforcement and national security. If he had any concerns regarding the email investigation, classified or not, he had ample opportunities to raise them with me both privately and in meetings. He never did, Lynch’s statement read.

In an interview with ABC host George Stephanopoulos that was broadcast Sunday night, Comey attacked Lynch and Obama. He said he went out on his own to announce the results of the Clinton probe because Lynch had no credibility.

“I actually thought, ‘As bad as this’ll be for me personally, this is my obligation, to protect the FBI and the Justice Department,’” Comey said. “Given all that had gone on, the attorney general of the United States could not credibly announce this result. And if she did, it would do corrosive damage to the institutions of justice.”

Lynch’s credibility gap was laid at Obama’s door.

”I think he felt a pressure in the political environment because he wanted Hillary Clinton to be elected, to give her a shot in the arm. And so he spoke about an investigation. And he shouldn’t have done that,” Comey said. “But that, as you can imagine, created this drumbeat that the Obama Justice Department, the fix is in because the president has told them what result they should reach.”

Jarrett has said Clinton’s actions in hiding her emails make a mockery of comments by Comey that they were “not intentionally deleted in an effort to conceal them.”

“Really? What other reason could possibly exist?  Clinton was just cleaning out her mailbox?” Jarrett wrote. “There is little doubt that Hillary Clinton flagrantly and shamelessly ignored the law. … Neither Clinton nor Comey are above the law, although they may think so.”

Obstructing justice could be one of several charges Comey could face, Jarrett said Sunday night.

“In the Federal Regulations, Code of Federal Regulations and the Privacy Act, as well as the Federal Records Act, anything that’s in the course and scope of your employment is government property. Every FBI agent signs a document that says ‘when you leave government, all of that is the government’s to remain behind, you are not to take it with you,’” he said. “Comey took it with him — seven presidential memos.”

“Everything you do in the course and scope of your employment is government property. He was acting as the FBI director when he spoke to the president, he wrote about their conversations. It’s clearly government property. He stole that government property, including, according to Senator Grassley, four classified documents, which would make him just as guilty as Hillary Clinton,” Jarrett added.

Judge In Cohen Case Was Almost Bill Clinton’s AG Nominee


Virginia Kruta | 9:34 PM 04/16/2018

Judge Kimba Wood, who is presiding over the case against President Donald Trump’s personal attorney Michael Cohen, was nearly nominated by then-President Bill Clinton to serve as attorney general in 1993. Wood was hand-picked by Hillary Clinton, who had been asked to submit a list of possible nominees for her husband’s consideration.

Wood first raised eyebrows when the Clinton White House learned that she had trained to be a Playboy bunny while still a student. She was later forced to withdraw herself from consideration when it was revealed that she had employed an illegal immigrant as a nanny.

Wood’s relationship with Clinton is now causing at least one Trump supporter to call for her recusal. Former White House adviser and frequent Fox News guest Sebastian Gorka tweeted on Monday that she should not be allowed anywhere near this case.

See article referenced at bottom of page

During Monday’s hearing, Judge Wood ordered Cohen to expose the identity of a previously unnamed client. Fox News host Sean Hannity was revealed to be the mystery client. Hannity has said that he only asked Cohen, a friend, for legal advice and he never retained or paid him for any legal services.

The article as it originally appeared.

View page in TimesMachine
, Page 001001 The New York Times Archives

Judge Kimba M. Wood withdrew today from consideration for Attorney General after the White House learned she had employed an illegal immigrant as a baby sitter before it became illegal to do so.

That stunning setback left President Clinton scrambling for the third time to fill the post.

There was no evidence that Judge Wood, who sits on the Federal District Court in New York, did anything illegal, but White House officials said they told her to withdraw because they feared the kind of public outcry that struck down the Administration’s first choice for Attorney General, Zoe Baird, who had employed two illegal aliens for household work. A Blank List

White House officials said they were angry at Judge Wood because she had not told Mr. Clinton and other officials about her baby sitter, even when she had been directly asked. In her statement, however, Judge Wood said she had not misled the White House.

After the hasty search for a first nominee, then the rush to replace Ms. Baird, the Clinton Administration was forced by Judge Wood’s withdrawal to start virtually from the beginning in looking for the nation’s top law-enforcement official.

“They have nobody on their list now, period,” said a Democratic Senator who is close to the White House. “They’ve got to start from scratch.”

As late as Thursday evening, White House officials confidently said Mr. Clinton planned to announce Judge Wood’s selection as soon as background checks were completed. But what the officials viewed as a done deal disintegrated later that night as officials questioned Judge Wood and studied documents she had submitted. Trained to Be Playboy Bunny

The sudden turnabout on Judge Wood is a blow to Mr. Clinton, who two weeks ago withdrew Ms. Baird’s name after she admitted she had hired the illegal immigrants and had knowingly neglected to pay the required taxes for household employees.

Tonight the White House issued a statement on behalf of Mr. Clinton. “I understand and respect Judge Wood’s decision not to proceed further with the possibility of being nominated as Attorney General,” it said. “I was greatly impressed with her as a lawyer, a judge and a person. I respect her legal talents, judicial record and integrity. I wish her well.”

The White House officials said they had also recently discovered that Judge Wood had briefly trained as a Playboy bunny years ago when she was a student in London and that they feared that that might become the source of jokes.

In the statement issued by her lawyer’s office in New York, Judge Wood did not cite her stint as a Playboy trainee but said the issue was her hiring of an illegal immigrant from Trinidad, who worked for her for seven years. Judge Wood said she did not act illegally because her baby sitter was hired in March 1986, several months before the enactment of a Federal law making hiring of illegal aliens unlawful. The baby sitter obtained legal residency in December 1987, she said.

“On Jan. 29, I met with the President at the White House to discuss the possibility of my appointment,” she wrote. “In the course of a wide-ranging discussion of policy issues, I was asked if I had a ‘Zoe Baird’ problem. I said I did not. And I do not.”

Judge Wood went on to say: “I have fulfilled every legal requirement with respect to the employment of our babysitter. Nevertheless, and after further consultations, I have concluded that in the current political environment, proceeding further with the possibility of my nomination would be inappropriate.” Problems With Backups

Complicating the matter is that the President is not ready to name a substitute candidate. Officials had initially said that if Judge Wood did not pass the background checks they would probably turn to Charles F. C. Ruff, a Washington lawyer and former senior Justice Department official, or former Gov. Gerald L. Baliles of Virginia. But today, they said that questions had been raised about whether Mr. Ruff had employed an illegal alien and that the President was not ready to pick Mr. Baliles.

George Stephanopoulos, the White House communications director, sought in an interview tonight to play down any implication that the Administration was at fault. He said Judge Wood was asked about the issue of illegal aliens once by the President and twice by Bernard W. Nussbaum, the White House chief counsel.

“The White House search process discovered the problem,” Mr. Stephanopoulos said. “Judge Wood was asked about this matter twice before she interviewed with the President and once in her interview with the President. As the process moved forward, the White House did discover it because she delivered financial records that she had hired a baby sitter who was in the country illegally. After this information was discovered, and after consultation with the White House, Judge Wood decided to withdraw.” 

Asked about the disclosure that she had trained to be a Playboy bunny, Mr. Stephanopoulos said, “I just don’t know anything about it.”

Officials close to the White House said the trouble developed in part because President Clinton, pressed by his wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton, insisted on finding a woman for Attorney General, which limited the field of Democratic contenders with a law-enforcement background. The problem with Judge Wood, they said, was that although she is a respected jurist, she lacked the law-enforcement and managerial credentials for the post. So when the disclosures arose, there was no great desire by Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., the Delaware Democrat who is chairman of the Judiciary Commitee, or other influential players to press her case. A Lark in London

Judge Wood is 49 years old and was appointed to the court by President Ronald Reagan in 1988. She had no experience with criminal cases before her appointment and had never conducted a trial before a jury. But she has earned the respect of other judges and lawyers who have come before her, and the President and Mrs. Clinton are said to have been favorably impressed when each interviewed her last week.

People close to the situation said Mr. Nussbaum contacted Judge Wood on Thursday to tell her that he had heard a rumor that she had put herself through the London School of Economics as a Playboy bunny.

According to people familiar with the conversation, Judge Wood told Mr. Nussbaum that in 1966 she was a student in London and that on a lark she had signed up for the bunny trainee program for the Playboy Club there. She told him she quit after five days, before actually being employed by the club or drawing a paycheck.

Mr. Nussbaum is said to have told Judge Wood that the episode would not disqualify her.

Even after the disclosures were made, officials said, Judge Wood wanted the White House to press ahead, as did some Administration officials. But the White House backed down, they said, after learning that Mr. Biden and others had serious reservations about the nomination.

As early as Thursday night, the White House struggled to contain the political fallout. Hours after some Administration officials told reporters an announcement on Judge Wood would be forthcoming as long as background checks did not turn up anything serious, officials called reporters at home after midnight to urge them to back off the story. At the time, they did not say there were developments that had diminished Judge Wood’s prospects. ‘They Want Squeaky Clean’

By this morning, White House officials said Judge Wood’s selection was in grave doubt, and as the day wore on and rumors flew through the capital it looked increasingly likely that her candidacy might not last the day.

Administration officials said Judge Wood and her husband, Michael Kramer, a political columnist for Time magazine, spent much of the day closeted with Administration officials in the hope of salvaging the nomination.

Officials involved in the background checks said the White House was being far more cautious than in the checks of Ms. Baird. They said officials were not only concerned about finding instances of illegality but anything that could raise any appearance of impropriety. “They want squeaky clean,” said one official involved in the process. “They’re worried about how all this will play in Peoria.”

Another official who was deeply involved in examining Judge Wood’s background expressed sympathy for the judge and said: “Under any other circumstances, this would have been totally ignored. But we can’t afford the battle right now. It’s a perception problem.”

Fellow judges who serve with Judge Wood in the Federal Courthouse in lower Manhattan also expressed sympathy for her.

“I’m very, deeply disappointed for her sake,” said Judge Thomas P. Griesa. “I think she would have made an outstanding Attorney General. “I’m really disappointed.”

Mueller Investigating $150k Trump Donation from Ukrainian Who Gave Hillary $13 Million


Reported By Chuck Ross | April 10, 2018 at 11:34am

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/mueller-investigating-150k-trump-donation-from-ukranian-who-gave-hillary-13-million/

Special counsel Robert Mueller’s office is investigating a $150,000 donation a Ukrainian businessman made to President Donald Trump’s charity in 2015, according to a new report. The donation, from steel magnate Victor Pinchuk, pales in comparison to contributions he gave to the charity established by Bill and Hillary Clinton.

The billionaire has contributed $13 million to the Clinton Foundation since 2006 and had access to Hillary Clinton while she served as secretary of state.  But Mueller is not investigating the Clintons. Instead, he is conducting a broad investigation of Trump, including the flow of foreign money into various Trump-controlled entities.

Mueller began investigating the Pinchuk donation after receiving documents in response to a subpoena issued to the Trump Organization — the real estate company Trump ran before entering politics.

In September 2015, Trump appeared via video link at a conference Pinchuk hosted in Kiev. Trump’s personal attorney, Michael Cohen, negotiated details of the event with Douglas Schoen, a former consultant for Bill Clinton, according to The New York Times.

Trump did not initially request payment for the appearance, but Cohen contacted Schoen at one point to request a $150,000 honorarium, The Times reported.

In a seemingly unrelated matter, the FBI raided Cohen’s Manhattan office and residence on Monday. The search was reportedly conducted for records related to Cohen’s payments to Stormy Daniels, a porn star claiming to have had an affair with Trump in 2006.

The Victor Pinchuk Foundation issued a statement to The Times, downplaying the donation to Trump. The charity reached out to Trump and other world leaders in order to “promote strengthened and enduring ties between Ukraine and the West,” it said.

Contact with Trump was made at a time when “it was by no means assured that Mr. Trump would be the Republican nominee in 2016,” the foundation pointed out.

Pinchuk appears to have had a much closer relationship to the Clintons. 

In June 2012, the billionaire attended a dinner at the Clintons’ residence. And through Schoen, Pinchuk lobbied the State Department in 2011 and 2013. Documents filed with the Justice Department show Schoen and Pinchuk met on several occasions in 2012 with Melanne Verveer, a close Clinton associate who then served as an ambassador-at-large for global women’s issues.

Bill Clinton attended Pinchuk’s annual Yalta conference, The New York Times reported on Feb. 13, 2014. Pinchuk also attended the former president’s 65th birthday party in Los Angeles.

The FBI reportedly investigated the Clinton Foundation over its foreign donations. The status of that investigation is unclear.

This story originally appeared on The Daily Caller News Foundation website.

MORE Politically INCORRECT Cartoons for April 10, 2018


Hillary Should Be Wearing an Orange Jumpsuit or White Straightjacket!


Authored by Tami Jackson | on

Hillary Insane featured

Hillary Clinton has lived a full life: chock full of radical avarice and deception! Any who have followed Hill and Bubba’s trajectory understand the couple are all about power. To that end, Bill is the charm offensive — some might say just plain offensive — schmoozing and flirting his way past any impediments and into the oft-times unwilling arms of any nearby non-Hillary female.

HRC is the schemer of the duo, navigating the rough waters left in the wake of Bill’s dalliances, acting as chief prosecutor and accuser of any Bill-Clinton-wronged-woman. Side by side Bill and Hill have trounced through life, disposing of enemies, slipping out of any and all repercussions and consequences, accumulating vast amounts of wealth and power. But Ms. Clinton failed to obtain her final bucket list item: POTUS. 

Suffering a near psychotic break, Hillary would not even deign to speak to her hordes of followers at the Jacob K. Javits Center in Midtown Manhattan. Instead she sent out lap-dog campaign chairman John Podesta to tell her weeping supporters to go home. Hill, it was rumored, was cussing up a white wine-infused blue streak in her hotel room. As if to emphasize the depths of the Clinton campaign despair, one staffer yelled into her phone, “Its a f***ing funeral!”

Since November 8, 2016, and Hillary’s crushing defeat by her nemesis, Donald Trump, Madam Pantsuits has been offering up one excuse after another, including her infamous book, What Happened. It seems Ms. C. cannot help herself — she has some twisted variety of Tourette syndrome whereby she can’t stop shouting excuses for why she lost.

According to Bill’s better (but in no way good) half, everyone is to blame for her electoral loss. Everyone but her.

Her latest gambit as described by Paula Priesse:

Hillary Clinton was in India today showing once again her pure hatred of flyover Americans.

Clinton: “There’s all that red in the middle, where Trump won. Now, I win the coasts, I win Illinois, Minnesota, places like that. But what the map doesn’t show you is that I won the places that represent two-thirds of America’s gross domestic product. So I won the places that are optimistic, diverse, dynamic, moving forward, and his whole campaign, Make America Great Again, was looking backwards.”

The delusional Hildabeast then added this BS about Trump’s pitch to voters:

“You don’t like black people getting rights, you don’t like women getting jobs, you don’t want to see that Indian-American succeeding more than you are, whatever your problem is, I’m going to solve it.”

So granny, you lost not because you were a lazy, corrupt and thoroughly uninspiring candidate, but because you believe half of America is poor, racist and sexist. If justice is ever served, this VILE AND EMBITTERED SHREW will spend her remaining years behind bars!

Amen Paula! You’re a woman after my own heart and said it well!

#NoMoreHillary

 

More Politically INCORRECT Cartoons for Tuesday March 20, 2018


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


She Won’t Go Away!

The Democrat party is through with Hillary and wishes she would just go away, but she continues to make a fool of herself.

Hillary Won’t Go AwayPolitical Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.

More Politically INCORRECT Cartoons for Monday March 19, 2018


Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoons and Memes for Friday March 16, 2018


Some Politically INCORRECT Cartoons and Memes for Wednesday March 14, 2018


Monica Lewinsky Breaks Silence, Reveals the Horrific Thing Bill Clinton Really Did to Her


Reported By Joe Saunders | March 10, 2018 at 10:27am

URL of the original posting site: https://conservativetribune.com/monica-lewinsky-breaks-silence-clinton/

Democrats trying to ride the #MeToo movement to a blue wave in November just hit a major snag. After a failed presidential candidate ran on an “I’m with her” slogan, and amid nationwide revulsion over seemingly endless revelations of sexual misconduct by powerful men (overwhelmingly liberals) against women, the setup for a Democrat midterm campaign aimed at turning out liberal women in huge numbers seemed set.

But now comes the most infamous White House intern in history to remind America how badly that “I’m with her” candidate treated a woman who’d been preyed on – and how the Democratic Party really feels about women who come between the party and political power.

In a 3,500-word essay for Vanity Fair this month, former White House intern/Bill Clinton paramour Monica Lewinsky offered a new take on her side of the scandal that convulsed the country and nearly drove the 42nd president from office.

And even for conservatives who remember the late 1990s, it’s a reminder of the horrific treatment Lewinsky received at Bill Clinton’s hands. Lewinsky called her affair with Bill Clinton a “gross abuse of power” and alluded to the way Hillary Clinton and fellow Democrats tried to smear her as an “unstable stalker.” She noted that the road to the affair was “littered with inappropriate abuse of authority, station, and privilege. (Full stop.)”

“Now, at 44, I’m beginning (just beginning) to consider the implications of the power differentials that were so vast between a president and a White House intern,” she wrote. “I’m beginning to entertain the notion that in such a circumstance the idea of consent might well be rendered moot.”

And every one of those words shows that Democrats are lying when they claim to be the party that protects women.

For liberals — even for the ones too young to remember the 1990s personally — the Clinton years are what the party aspires to be. And the Clinton machine — the one that rigged the 2016 primary to ensure Hillary’s victory — won’t have it any other way. Hillary was supposed to have been the one who stood up for women’s rights, particularly when she delivered a famous speech in China (The New York Times called it a hint of Clinton’s future presidential run).

She built her campaign around the whole “first woman president” idea, making much of her ability to break the “glass ceiling” of being the first woman to win the nomination of a major party for president. (Former Republican presidential contender Carly Fiorina took that claim apart in an interview just as the 2016 Democratic National Convention was getting started.)

And in 2018, Democrats are planning to use the women’s issue again in midterm elections to try to cripple the presidency of Donald Trump. But Lewinsky’s essay is going to be a reminder of just what the Democratic Party was willing to do on Bill Clinton’s behalf in the 1990s, when he looked America in the eye on television and talked about a young White House intern like she was a two-dollar streetwalker in Little Rock.

“I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky,” Clinton said in televised address in January 1998, wagging his finger for emphasis.

Well, “that woman” remembered it differently. And she was in the unfortunate position to know. (One of her dresses was in an unfortunate position too, as it turned out.) But Democrats locked arms to protect Clinton then, and Hillary famously branded the young Lewinsky a narcissistic loony toon.”

Lewinsky was a threat to their political power then, and Clinton-machine Democrats are ruthless when it comes to threats to their power — as Juanita Broaddrick, Paula Jones and Kathleen Wiley can all confirm.

Lewinsky’s essay is a reminder of just how badly Democrats treat women who get in the way of their agenda. All the posturing in the world isn’t going to change that — and let’s hope the 2018 midterms prove it.

Dear CNN: Look How Many Jobs The U.S. Added Last Month – Can You Say, ‘Stable Genius?’


Published by ClashDaily.com | on March 9, 2018

URL of the original posting site: https://clashdaily.com/2018/03/dear-cnn-look-many-jobs-u-s-added-last-month-can-say-stable-genius/

Are the left’s ‘experts’ still pretending this is Obama’s economy? Under that old guy, we were told that the craptastic numbers during his presidency were the ‘new normal’.

Weird. Becuase the NEW guy ran on specific policy platforms which he promised would result in significant economic growth. And we’re seeing exactly the kind of growth he predicted. For all those people who tell us every day how much they ‘love science’ … which President do you think actually understands the real-world economic consequences of his policies?

BOOM.

Here’s yet another strong month of jobs growth. This must be some more of those ‘crumbs’ Pelosi was telling us about.

313,000 jobs were added last month, the most since October 2015 and the 89th straight month of gains, a record. Economists had anticipated a gain of about 200,000.

The unemployment rate was 4.1 percent, the same as in January and still a 17-year low.
Source: NYTimes

Here’s a little perspective on that. Remember those ‘bold’ economic predictions by the experts? The ones who cheered Hillary and panned Trump? Here’s another look at one of them.

These are the experts who keep telling us that anything a Republican proposes will result in the sky falling.

Right. “Experts.”

More Politically INCORRECT Cartoons for February 27, 2018


california dems moving further leftdueling memoseconomy up polls downhollywoods answer to gun violence is to create more movies with gun violencerussia with hillarywe need toban forkswhat a kookwhy cant we protect our schoolsplease likeand share and leave a comment

With Indictments of Russians, the Groundwork Is in Place to Criminally Charge Hillary


Authored By Erin Coates | February 20, 2018 at 3:42pm

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/indictments-russians-groundwork-place-criminally-charge-hillary/

The indictments of Russian nationals for meddling with the election could “make the Clinton Campaign a potential target,” according to a California lawyer.

In an opinion piece for Law & Crime, Robert Barnes said that Robert Mueller indicted of 13 Russians and three Russian companies because they did not register as foreign agents or record financial expenditures to the Federal Elections Commissions.

They were foreign citizens; they tried to influence an election; and they neither registered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act nor reported their funding to the Federal Elections Commission,” he wrote. 

Under this claim, there are three things that “make the Clinton Campaign a potential target,” according to Barnes.

The first one is that they knew Christopher Steele, the author of the infamous Russia-Trump dossier, was a foreign citizen.

According to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s press conference on the indictments, the Russians “used stolen or fictitious American identities, fraudulent bank accounts and false identification documents” to hide their activities.

The next potentially criminating thing is that the Clinton campaign “knew, and paid, Steele to influence an election.” 

Similarly, the indictments showed that twelve defendants worked for a company called Internet Research Agency, LLC, based in St. Petersburg. It reportedly operated through Russian shell companies.

“It employed hundreds of people in its online operations, ranging from creators of fictitious personas, to technical and administrative support personnel, with an annual budget of millions of dollars,” Rosenstein said.

Lastly, the Clinton campaign “knew, and facilitated, Steele” not registering as a foreign agent or reporting that he was being funded by the Clinton campaign to the Federal Election Commissions. He instead disguised the payments as a “legal expense.”

Steele himself, based on Mueller’s theory, is a criminal under the same guidelines as the Russian indictments. He is a foreign citizen, was paid to influence an election, and never registered as a foreign agent or listed his expenditures. 

The Clinton campaign is not the only potential target under Mueller’s theory. The DNC, Perkins Coie and Fusion GPS could also be targeted for indictment, according to Barnes. However, Barnes said not to expect an indictment of any of these people or organizations.

“Mueller chose his targets because he knows they will never appear in court, never contest the charges, and cannot be arrested or extradited as Russian citizens,” he wrote. 

Barnes is a California-based trial attorney who focuses on Constitutional, criminal and civil rights law.

More Politically INCORRECT Cartoons for February 13, 2018


More Politically INCORRECT Cartoons for February 9, 2018


Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: