Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘President Trump’

Times Square Billboard Depicts President Hogtied on White House Lawn


Written By Paul Duke |

President Trump is a Commander in Chief like no other, and that is true for a multitude of unique reasons.

Not only has he come from outside of Washington DC with the sole purpose to shake up what criminality and corruption lives within, but he has down so while under unprecedented attack both by the media and by the legislative branch.

Furthermore, Trump has found himself at the center of a focused and aggravating campaign to normalize depictions of violence against him, starting with Kathy Griffin’s gruesome beheading stunt, and culminating this week as his visage is hogtied several stories above New York City’s Times Square.

An athletic clothing brand has launched a controversial campaign that seems to take aim at President Trump; indeed, a billboard ad in Times Square has him hogtied in front of the White House.
On Wednesday, the brand, Dhvani, unveiled the first in a series of images meant to protest the Trump administration’s “gag rule” prohibiting doctors at Title X-funded clinics from referring patients for abortions — a rule that prompted Planned Parenthood to pull out of the federal grant program in August.
The billboard ad, called “Lady Liberty,” showed model Michal Mesa, whom Dhvani described in a press release as a Marine Corps veteran and a middle school teacher, standing over a screaming President Trump with her foot on his head. He is tied up, and a storm floats over the White House.

“We are proud to join Planned Parenthood in defending women from assaults on our reproductive rights,” said Dhvani’s chief communications officer, Chloe Mason. “Trump administration policies are threatening the health and bodily autonomy of women, especially women of color, low-income women and LGBTQ women.”

This normalization of violence against the President is both disheartening and dangerous, especially for a man who has already been the victim of at least one assassination attempt back in 2016.

Newest Section of Trump’s Border Wall Brings Total to Over 70 Miles


Posted By |

It’s rarely covered in the media, but the border wall between the U.S. and Mexico is currently under construction and there has been a lot wall built so far. In total, the Trump administration is planning on a total of over 500 miles of new border wall. With the latest construction underway, this will bring the total number to just over 70 miles of the completed wall.

KRGV in Texas reported,

It’s the second project of its kind in the Rio Grande Valley. This is the ground preparation for the construction of a new border wall.
CHANNEL 5 NEWS asked Border Patrol about the contractors, agents and equipment we’re seeing at this location. They referred us to an April memo announcing $145 million and a contract with SLSCO to build 13 miles of border wall in the Valley.

According to the construction website this next section is only to be 6 miles and the company’s contract calls for the construction and installation of “tactical infrastructure,” which includes building a reinforced concrete levee wall to the height of the existing levee; installing 18-foot-tall steel bollards on top of the concrete wall; removing vegetation within the 150-foot enforcement zone along the path of the new levee wall; building an all-weather patrol road next to the wall and the installation of “detection technology,” lighting and a video surveillance system.

There is actually a very reliable website to track the progress of the border wall being built. The person who created it is a Trump supporter who realized that there weren’t any accurate updates on the building of the wall so he created an interactive site for us to track the progress.

The website is Trump Wall Construction. According to this site, the total number of miles that have been built is 89 with over 500 more miles remaining to be constructed.

Opinion: Luckily, Dems Never Have ‘Personal, Political’ Motives


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Oct 10, 2019 9:30 AM

Luckily, Dems Never Have ‘Personal, Political’ Motives | Source: AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite

Today we will answer the question: May a president ask a foreign country to investigate corruption if it serves his “personal, political” interests? The “personal, political” angle is the last gasp of the impeachment hysterics. (I’m looking at you, Sens. Rob Portman (Ohio), Susan Collins (Maine), Mitt Romney (Utah) and Ben Sasse (Nebraska).)

Yes, Donald Trump is, technically, “president,” and, yes, former Vice President Joe Biden used his government position to withhold foreign aid until the president of Ukraine fired a prosecutor looking into a company paying Biden’s drug addict son millions of dollars for mysterious reasons. But, the impeachment fanatics assert, by asking a foreign leader to assist in an otherwise legitimate corruption investigation, Trump has committed a monstrous crime — because he was pursuing a “personal political interest.” To wit: Trump was trying to harm his political opponent, Joe Biden.

Apart from the blindingly obvious fact that you can’t commit crimes and then escape justice simply by running for president, Democrats take official government action for “personal, political” reasons all the time. Frequently, they do so for the sole purpose of harming their political opponents.

President Barack Obama’s IRS investigated and harassed conservative groups for years, using the most fearsome arm of the government to punish political enemies — for personal, political reasons. Then his Department of Justice refused to prosecute the corrupt officials, which, I believe, was again for — yes, it was personal, political reasons.

How about the Obama administration’s endless investigations of Ferguson, Missouri, police officer Darren Wilson? As was obvious from the outset, Officer Wilson had done absolutely nothing wrong when he fatally shot Mike Brown — something even Obama’s corrupt, subpoena-defying attorney general, Eric Holder, had to concede after reviewing all the evidence.

Those massive Department of Justice investigations were undertaken to gin up the Democratic base in order to help Hillary, who proceeded to honor Mike Brown’s mother on stage at the Democratic National Convention.

In the most perfect example of a president demanding investigations for no other purpose than serving a “personal, political” interest, in 1999, when Hillary was gearing up to run for the Senate from New York against Mayor Rudy Giuliani, President Bill Clinton (her husband) launched investigation after investigation into the crown jewel of the Giuliani administration, the NYPD.

In 1999, as the NYPD was virtually eliminating crime in New York City, there were a grand total of 11 fatal shootings by police officers. That’s 0.28 fatal shootings for every 1,000 officers.

In Washington, D.C., that year, there were four times as many fatal police shootings — 1.14 per 1,000 cops. In Houston, the number was 1.68. In San Diego, it was 4.36.

In the end, Giuliani withdrew from the race to treat his prostate cancer, but when President Clinton was demanding these investigations, Rudy was crushing Hillary both in the polls and in political contributions.

Speaking of whom, Hillary used her position as secretary of state to overthrow Libyan strongman Muammar Qaddafi, leading to the murder of a U.S. ambassador and several other Americans in Benghazi, as well as creating the refugee crisis currently engulfing Western Europe — all for her own personal, political reasons.

As was dramatically revealed in Hillary’s email exchanges with her unofficial adviser, Sidney Blumenthal, her motive for deposing Qaddafi was to display her foreign policy chops, apart from that lunkhead Obama, who was, as Blumenthal sneered, “intent on seizing defeat from the jaws of victory.”

Blumenthal egged on Hillary to keep the pressure on Qaddafi, promising her a major political win. When Qaddafi was ousted, Blumenthal exulted: “First, brava! You must go on camera. You must establish yourself in the historical record at this moment. … You are vindicated.”

Soon thereafter, Qaddafi was beaten to death in the desert by rebels who posted graphic video of the murder online. Cackling with delight at the initial reports, Hillary positioned herself alongside Julius Caesar: “We came. We saw. He died.”

Most obviously, the Obama administration’s entire illegal FBI surveillance of the Trump campaign was undertaken for personal, political purposes. We’ve been waiting for three years to hear some legitimate reason for the FBI’s surveillance of the Trump campaign. At this point, I think it’s fair to say, we’re not getting one.

The Obama administration spent millions of dollars and millions of man-hours on a purely political investigation to hurt Trump and help elect Hillary.

As long as you mention it, the House Democrats’ investigation of Trump’s phone call to the Ukrainian president has been undertaken for personal political reasons, too. So was Biden’s withholding of a $1 billion check from the president of Ukraine to protect his son’s sleazy business deal.

We can play the “personal, political motive” game all day long!

At least when Republicans do it, the Middle East doesn’t explode in jihadist fury, the crime rate doesn’t skyrocket, people don’t die or lose their livelihoods — and there’s real corruption being exposed.

Ann Coulter’s Latest Book Resistance Is Futile!: How the Trump-Hating Left Lost Its Collective Mind is available on Amazon

Deep State IG Releases Statement: Why They Changed Whistleblower Forms to Include: Watercooler Talk, Rumors, Hearsay and Cafeteria Conversations


Posted By 

URL of the original posting site: https://redrightvideos.com/deep-state-ig-releases-statement-why-they-changed-whistleblower-forms-to-include-watercooler-talk-rumors-hearsay-and-cafeteria-conversations/

Most of you are probably aware that the rules for whistleblower complaints were recently changed. This actually created an issue due to the timing when it was done. It was changed just before the whisteblower complaint was filed against President Trump for his call with Ukrainian President Zelensky which is VERY suspicious.

The Deep State Intelligence Community Inspector General, Michael Atkinson, released a news statement this week explaining why they thought it necessary to alter the rules on whistleblower complaints to include watercooler talk, rumors, hearsay and cafeteria conversations rather than just firsthand information.

Here is what Atkinson said about changing the rules,

“Although the form requests information about whether the Complainant possesses first-hand knowledge about the matter about which he or she is lodging the complaint, there is no such requirement set forth in the statute. In fact, by law the Complainant – or any individual in the Intelligence Community who wants to report information with respect to an urgent concern to the congressional intelligence committees – need not possess first-hand information in order to file a complaint or information with respect to an urgent concern. The ICIG cannot add conditions to the filing of an urgent concern that do not exist in law.”

Read the full news release from the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community down below:

Atkinson also said that the CIA “whistleblower’s” concerns appeared credible so they made everything urgent, even though the CIA has proven to be as compromised.

All of this tells us a number of things.

First, we now know that there is a spy in the White House. Secondly, that there is a purposeful attempt to gain damaging information on President Trump in the attempt at removing him from office. This is a coup d’etat attempt, it’s as clear as day and it needs to stop because this is treason.

You Ask a Lot of Questions for a President


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Oct 02, 2019 4:12 PM

You Ask a Lot of Questions for a President | Source: AP Photo/Evan Vucci

This column will explain the impeachment farce in two minutes. By the end, you will thank the media for demanding the release of Trump’s phone calls with the presidents of Ukraine and Australia.

What the phone transcripts demonstrate is that — unlike the typical Republican — Trump is not a let-bygones-be-bygones sort. He intends to find out who turned the FBI into a Hillary super PAC, using the powers of the nation’s “premiere law enforcement agency” (according to them) to take out a presidential candidate, and then a president.

The whole picture becomes clear when you have the timeline.

Instead of the FBI just admitting that it launched the Russia probe to help elect Hillary, the agency has given us a scrolling series of excuses for this partisan attack. The FBI’s first claim was that it was merely investigating the hack of the Democratic National Committee’s email servers. As part of that effort, it was, naturally, obligated to spy on the Trump campaign.

Then we found out that the John le Carre theory of Hillary’s defeat was based exclusively on the word of a single cybersecurity firm. Yes, the FBI was SO frantic about the DNC’s servers … that it didn’t bother examining them itself. I repeat: The FBI never touched the DNC’s servers.

And who did? CrowdStrike. Who was CrowdStrike? A Ukrainian-backed cybersecurity firm.

That’s why Trump asked the Ukrainian president about CrowdStrike –- the company behind the first of the FBI’s many excuses for spying on Trump.

On Jan. 10, 2017 — before Trump was even inaugurated — FBI Director James Comey breathed new life into the Russian collusion story by leaking news about the infamous Russian “dossier.”

Hurray! The media were ecstatic. For the next 10 months, we got breathless reports about how this very important, totally credible, deeply concerning dossier might force Trump out of the White House! <

E.g.:

— “I remember pretty distinctly that you supported President Trump’s criticism of this dossier … Do you want to dial back that criticism now?” — CNN’s Kate Bolduan to former Rep. Pete Hoekstra, April 19, 2017
— “If the dossier is now about to be publicly defended and explained and backed up, I mean, that’s conceivably the whole ball game.” — MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, Aug. 23, 2017

This rather important datum was coughed up not by the media, but only in response to a court order. Good work, “watchdog media”! Nothing gets past you guys.

Suddenly the dossier wasn’t important at all. Where did Republicans get that idea?

At this point, the FBI had to scramble to come up with an all-new explanation for why the bureau had put more than 100 agents — according to NBC News’ Ken Dilanian –- on an investigation of a presidential candidate. (Luckily, the bureau had lots of time, having already vanquished international terrorism.)

Within a matter of days, on Oct. 30, the media was bristling with the news that the real reason the FBI put G-Men on the Trump campaign was: George Papadopoulos.

(Don’t stop reading! The sun is about come out and all will be clear.)

Up until Oct. 24, the media had barely mentioned the young campaign aide. But starting on Oct. 30, Papadopoulos became the lynchpin of the whole Trump-Russia conspiracy. It was a heavy lift. Papadopoulos had only met Trump once and, as The New York Times admitted, was “so green that he listed Model United Nations in his qualifications.”

A few months later, in December 2017, the Russian collusion fairy tale took a hit when texts from Peter Strzok and Lisa Page showed FBI operatives at the heart of the so-called “investigation” vowing to use federal law enforcement resources to “stop” Trump.

The FBI began frantically pumping up the Papadopoulos angle, telling the Times that it was their gob-smacking discovery in the summer of 2016 that Papadopoulos may have had “inside information” about Russia “hacking” the DNC’s email that was a “driving factor” in the bureau’s opening of the Russia-Trump investigation.

So THAT’S why the nation’s No. 1 law enforcement agency had 100 agents investigating the Trump campaign! It sure took them a long time to come up with a reason.

Pending results from Trump’s phone call with the Australian president, Papadopoulos remains the FBI’s current excuse for an “investigation” that wasted four years, millions of dollars and, in the end, turned up nada.

The story was, in the summer of 2016, Australian high commissioner to the United Kingdom Alexander Downer contacted the FBI claiming that Papadopoulos had admitted to him during a night of drinking that he knew the Russians had Hillary’s emails. Two months later, Wikileaks began posting the DNC’s emails!

HOW ELSE CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT, UNLESS TRUMP WAS COLLUDING WITH RUSSIA?

I can explain it.

When Papadopoulos was blabbing to the Australian about the Russians having Hillary’s emails, everyone was talking about the Russians having Hillary’s emails — CNN, The Guardian, even ABC’s “The View.” (See Resistance Is Futile!: How the Trump-Hating Left Lost Its Collective Mind.) Papadopoulos’ “source” probably read it in The New York Times.

Perhaps Downer is always completely oblivious to international news. Perhaps he spends too much time drinking with 28-year-olds.

Trump’s phone call with the president of Australia, released this week, suggests that we just might get to the bottom of the big Alexander Downer tipoff — the FBI’s latest cover story.

Now you know why all of official Washington, D.C., is screaming: IMPEACH! They don’t want you to find out that America’s “premiere law enforcement agency” tried to throw a presidential election and destroy a presidency.

Ann Coulter’s Latest Book Resistance Is Futile!: How the Trump-Hating Left Lost Its Collective Mind is available on Amazon

Full Unclassified Whistleblower Complaint


The Transcript We Really Want to See


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Sep 25, 2019 7:04 PM

The Transcript We Really Want to See | Joe and Hunter Biden | Source: AP Photo/Nick Wass

Editor’s note: The following column contains graphic language.

The transcript of President Trump’s phone call with Ukrainian President Zelensky is yet another illustration of the rule: Never ask a question you don’t know the answer to.

But on the basis of one drama queen’s overreaction to a rumor she’d heard about what was said on a phone call she didn’t hear (I’m assuming the whistleblower is Christine Blasey Ford), the Democrats have launched impeachment proceedings against the president.

I guess they figured it’s easier than flying to South Dakota with picks and chisels and carving Trump into Mount Rushmore. But it will have the same effect.

Now that the transcript has been released, it’s The New York Times that doesn’t want anyone to see it.

The transcript I’d like to see is the one of Nancy Pelosi reading the Trump transcript. 

F@@@@@@CK! Whose f***ing idea was it to demand this goddamn transcript?
F@CK!
F@@CK!
F@@@CK!

The absolute worst version for Trump — i.e. the one being repeated non-stop on MSNBC — is that he did exactly what Obama and Biden were doing to Ukraine: intimidating an ally into giving us something in exchange for the foreign aid we were giving them.

Biden himself bragged about getting Ukraine’s prosecutor fired by threatening to withhold a big fat check from them.

The Democrats’ argument is: No, no, no! When WE were pressuring Ukraine, we were doing it for good! Don’t you understand? We’re good; they’re bad.

The other reason the media are going to have to bury this transcript is that Trump brought up a few items that the media have been hoping the public would never find out about.

Trump said: “There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the attorney general would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution, so if you can look into it … It sounds horrible to me.”

Well, that’s something the media haven’t mentioned before. Ninety-nine percent of Americans will be hearing about the funny business with Biden’s son, Hunter, for the first time with the release of this transcript.

Why did Vice President Biden order the Ukrainian president to fire the prosecutor investigating the Ukrainian company paying his son millions of dollars? Are Democrats claiming that this company was clean as a whistle and it was an absolute OUTRAGE that it was being investigated?

The second issue the media does not want anyone to think about is CrowdStrike.

What is CrowdStrike, you ask? That is the cybersecurity firm that is the sole source of the claim that the Russians hacked the DNC’s emails — which launched the conspiracy theories that tied our country in knots for the past three years.

The Russian collusion story was originally hatched by Hillary Clinton in the summer of 2016 to cover up the utter corruption revealed by the dump of Democratic National Committee emails on Wikileaks. As was her practice whenever a scandal threatened to engulf her, Hillary rushed out and told the press to investigate something else.

And “the great story” about the DNC email hack wasn’t about a “vast right-wing conspiracy” — as she claimed when the Monica Lewinsky scandal broke. No, this time, it was a vast Russian conspiracy!

At the time, the entire media laughed at Hillary’s Russian conspiracy nonsense — The New York Times, New York Newsday, the Los Angeles Times and so on. But then Trump won the election, and suddenly the Russia conspiracy seemed totally believable. What else could explain how Americans could put this boob in the White House?

The subsequent three years of breathless Russia coverage was based entirely on the word of one cybersecurity firm, CrowdStrike, that the DNC’s emails had been hacked by Russia.

Recall that the DNC wouldn’t allow the FBI or any other U.S. government official anywhere near its computers. That’s precisely why so many cybersecurity experts doubted that it was the Russians: The FBI was never allowed to perform its own investigation.

CrowdStrike was founded by Ukrainian Dmitri Alperovitch (now an American citizen apparently — because who isn’t?) and funded by the fanatically anti-Russian Ukrainian oligarch Viktor Pinchuk Foundation.

Talk about interfering with our democracy! Alperovitch and Pinchuk sent one political party and nine-tenths of the American media off on a wild goose chase into Russian collusion that, after years of accusations, investigations and embarrassing conspiracy-mongering … turned up goose eggs.

The entire Russian insanity was launched by a couple of Ukrainians. I think a lot of us would like to get to the bottom of that.

This is why Trump said to President Zelensky: “I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say CrowdStrike … I guess you have one of your wealthy people … The server, they say Ukraine has it.”

(How’d you like to be the Ukrainian translator for a Trump conversation?)

Trump has been justly criticized for hiring his daughter and son-in-law at the White House. But at least when he pressures a foreign leader for a favor, it’s to investigate corruption, not to get a prosecutor off his son’s back. Maybe Biden’s son was guilty, maybe he was innocent. But it is a fact that Joe Biden held up foreign aid to a desperately needy ally in exchange for their halting prosecution that implicated his son. It’s not Trump’s fault that Biden is now running for president.

I’ll give the Democrats this: They’ve gotten so good at trying to remove Trump from office that, instead of three years, their insane accusations blow up in their faces within a week.

Ann Coulter’s Latest Book Resistance Is Futile!: How the Trump-Hating Left Lost Its Collective Mind is available on Amazon

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: