+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This from one of my aging fraternity brothers from college days , a conservative and fellow memo reader. (See 1 below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
What would Hamilton do? A Democrat answers. (See 2 below.)
And:
One man certainly likes Trump, warts and all. (See 2a below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Bibi has 12 more days. (See 3 below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Democrats have used character assassination for years as an effective tactic and they certainly have every intention of trying to destroy Barr's reputation, if possible. In fact, they have begun and you can hear the drum beat already because they have to get ahead of the release of his and Atty. Durham's reports. (See 4 below.)
And:
The Deep State is deeper than anyone knows or believes. (See 4a below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I have no doubt the CIA is not opposed to using it's "dirty tricks" against our own nation when it serves the masters who run the organization.
There are times when patriot's do cross the line and become overly zealous, thus,,dangerous and therefore, can do great harm thinking they are Paul Revere's. (See 5 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dick
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1)Pauline Kael famously said she couldn't believe Nixon won because nobody she knew voted for him.
Herein please find the viewpoint of the right. You should know this to know what you're up against. The key is to know your enemy. Too many educated elites are in a bubble and don't know what others think.
Furthermore, very few of these people interact with regular folk, except for opinion writers in newspapers, they don't get the contrary feedback. But if you're online, like me, you get it each and every time you write something even vaguely political, that's why I knew Trump had a chance in 2016. You need to read these.
______________________________
______________________________
Love you man, but you are missing a big point here, one you've written about many times.
Re: Biden, yes he is toast and yes, he did nothing illegal. Repeat, nothing illegal. Neither did Hunter. BUT..... it stinks. You know it. I know. The public knows it. The Chinese could invest 1.5B with best investors in the world, Sequoia, Benchmark, you name it. They were all my competitors. They are without equal. But they invested in Hunters bullshit fund to curry favor with a possible, yet unlikely, President to be.
Ditto, Clinton Foundation, Ditto Chelsea's first job at NBC. Nothing illegal, but simply our version of the Chinese Communist Party's sons and daughters, the Pricelings." who magically become multi millionaires because the Party Leaders dole out their largess to them and them alone. Hunter is our American Priceling. Nothing illegal. But very very bad judgment from Joe.
Elites in both parties do it. Dems don't have a corner on this. The public is sick of it. Lori Loughlin adios. It's all the same. We can't wait to see her in an orange jump suit.
What Hunter should do but cannot is stand up, show his investment record and say, "this is why the Chinese invested in me." But he can't. They invested in him because of his last name. Come on man, you know this.
All the best, buddy. Hope to see you sometime in LA.
Sorry about typos or autocorrect.....
John Hummer
______________________________
This battle Bob is about the Constitution. Is it a Written in stone Constitution? (yes) or a Living Constitution (No Constitution at all) It's also about the wealth of the country. When you work, is it your money or not? The Conservative says it's yours, you earned it. The Democrat says, no, it's not yours. It's unfair you have it, so we're gonna force some of it from you (51% force against the 49%)
I have trouble understanding how you can vote for force against your neighbor the way you do??? I also wonder how you can believe some bureaucrat knows better than you how to allocate the wealth you produce? Lastly, you can always write a check to do all those things you believe are right. No one's stopping you from handing over 70% of what you earn ya know? You don't have to force anyone else. You do it.
Rich Case
______________________________
Why can't you be fair & balanced plus deal with facts?
Or stick to why we all love you...the Arts?
Thank-you...
Michael K. Clifford
VentureCatalyst
______________________________
"guilty of something"? His son received billions of dollars from foreign governments only while he was VP. There was an entire expose published by the Hill called "Biden Money" three years ago exposing his questionable finances from foreign sources. And he had a quid pro quo arrangement with Ukraine to fire the prosecutor investigating the company his son was on the board of (ON VIDEO). This is highly specific stuff and more than "guilty of something" your cribbing the Democrats when the said "some people did something" on 9/11
Russ Motta
______________________________
So, Bob, you think that impeachment - or whatever the Hell Pelosi is doing without a formal vote of the House - is about a straight nullification of the 2016 election. No "high crime or misdemeanor", no problem. We won the House so we can Impeach.
It is difficult to fathom how dumb this view is.
But at least you are passionate about it and that has to count for something.
Trump is going to win so big his big old orange head will explode.
Cheers,
Jay Currie
______________________________
Trump 2020
Haley 2024
The Nation will be back on track.
Clarence Jay
Lefty sore loser of 2016. If Dems thought they’d win 2020 they wouldn’t try to impeach the President of the USA now and let the election play out.
James Davis
______________________________
If Eric Trump went on Air Force One with Donald and came back with a Board seat on some company in Korea you would have a fit.
But Bidens done nothing wrong
Balrama Balrama
______________________________
Trump landslide 2020. The Democrats are a mess. I was one for 30 years. Never again. Thanks
Thomas Ryan
______________________________
ask yourself one simple question:
if it was don trump jr with the same $$$ deal as hunter biden
if he had traveled to ukraine and russia on air force one with his father to secure these deals...
would the LEFT have their hair on fire?
Ira Transport
______________________________
Change the narrative to "Democrat" and you can write the same story. Except the majority of all types of media are onboard with them, not just a few sites. smh,..
Craig Nickman
______________________________
"And at least Warren said that nobody likes their health insurance company. A truism we all know."
Another truism we all know: whatever the government does, it will always do it worse than the private sector.
Cheers!
Steve Hurlburt
______________________________
If you stopped right here, you'd finally be correct, Watch news from something other than what you watch,,,
You're not getting the whole story. You never do. You just don’t.
John Warden
______________________________
The United States is a REPUBLIC, not a democracy.
The two political parties are the Republicans and the Democrats.
The REPUBLICAN party and the DEMOCRAT party.
NOT the "Democratic" party.
Bob Askey
______________________________
Bob, you blame 'politics' but really your party betrayed you and the rest of America a long time ago. Wake up!
Ax Hayssen
______________________________
Everything you say is probably true.
However, it must be acknowledged that everywhere that the democrats have total control, California, Chicago, NYC. etc. all have major, major problems the rest of the country does not have.
I live in LA, as you do, we don't need to go into these issues.
People in the rest of the country see these problems and say "Hell no, I don't want the democrats in charge".
They have a point.
Regards
Thaddeus Graham
______________________________
Bob,
Thanks for the truth...as always.
I'm voting (again) for Trump in 2020 because his administration is making progress in many areas, despite the stalling in Congress. This administration is serving "us" while doing what we asked (before we knew how bad it really was)..."clean up the government."
And when both sides realize that once the stink on the Hill is at least under some control, perhaps both sides can actually work together again.
It's so simple, yet seems impossible today...both sides have ideas worthy of consideration. However, you can't hear another's story or idea when all you do is receive and vomit the morning talking points, created by a group of out-of-touch, greedy, narcissistic, and sophomaniac fucks.
While I'd like to say "we are the government and via the elections, we employ those to serve us and the country," I cannot with a straight face. However, this administration is as close to what the Founding Fathers had in mind. Perhaps after a few drinks, but close.
I have to remind myself that those on either side are not all geniuses. Hardly any in fact! And for those who are, that doesn't qualify them to not represent who got them to the dance. Nor does it provide in any way, shape or form, a right to be an outright, disrespectful, idiot that in the real world would fail or be ostrasized. Or at the very least, made to spend his/her career as CNN's White House reporter...along side the current genius.
Thanks again Bob. I hope this article goes viral.
Bill in Indy
______________________________
When the Democratic party starts respecting our constitution, which has laws we agreed to, then people will take the party more seriously.
Taxes - the dems have consistently raised taxes, with little regard to budgets.
It’s embarrassing to watch Pelosi talk about ANYTHING other than taking care of her district, that 'elected' her; yet she has failed them.
Homeless people crapping on public streets, in front of businesses, and she is going to talk about problems". Does she just drive past that and pretend it doesn’t exist? She’ll proudly fight for illegal immigration, yet ignore her own people? And that is really the microcosm of the problem. When Obama was in office, it just fine to stand up to our immigration laws, but when it comes from big bad Trump, it’s racist?
The democratic party’s double standard and proof of lack of actual progress is starting to catch up with them. People are getting tired of excuses and nice speeches with little progress. Democrats are more focused on finding ANYTHING to impeach Trump, that they are unfocused on doing the job they were "elected" to do; which is serve the people. In fact, if they are such a stand-up group of people, why are they not for term-limits?
While both parties are lacking efficiency and focus; the democratic party is so far out there, that they really are disconnected from America.
They don’t even realize that many of the speeches they give are speaking to the wrong group of people. Just look at Illinois, where the democratic taxes are driving people out of the state to move out. Or Chicago, a democratic controlled city that is a war zone. There is even a analytical website built on the daily crime in Chicago: http://heyjackass.com
But the dems want to tell you it’s all about gun control. Never mind judicial responsibility and accountability. Neverminf addressing mental health. Never mind standing up for the police. Never mind the HUGE debt. They want to spend $500 million on a Obama library and focus on great drawings. Never mind focusing on REAL problems. It’s kind of like Hollywood, the rich and famous drive past the highest level of homeless people on the streets, then arrive the award show to posture themselves and their egos; and then say 'we need more equality'!! Really???? And then they blame Trump for that?
The word is seeing thru the bullshit. See the ratings? See who won the presidency? How’s the ratings for CNN doing? See the attendance at Trump rally’s? I don’s recall a single democratic candidate say "America first"; I hear it from Trump all the time. And as much of a jackass of the mouth/twitter he is, I can see many positive things he has accomplished. Think about all the time and money we (the tax payers of costs they spend) have lost for investigations, hearings, trials, speeches, interviews, stories and social media/media on things that are UNFOCUSED at our needs.
I will not be surprised to see Trump win again in 2020. And I would say it’s more because of the behavior of the democratic party than the positive accomplishments Trump achieves. If I was a democratic candidate, I wouldn’t even bring Trump into my pitch to gain votes. I would focus on solutions to AMERICAN problems. The debates next year will be the best drama TV the world has ever seen. I bet ratings will be higher than the Super Bowl.
Richard Hofherr
www.7thheavenband.com
--
Visit the archive: http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: https://ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: https://apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
http://www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
http://www.lefsetz.com/lists/?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2) Hamilton Wouldn't Impeach Trump
By Alan M. Dershowitz
Editor’s note: The opinions in this article are the author’s, as published by our content partner, and do not necessarily represent the views of MSN or Microsoft.
What is an impeachable offense? Rep. Maxine Waters, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, says the definition is purely political: “whatever Congress says it is—there is no law.” She’s wrong.
At the Constitutional Convention of 1787, the Framers debated impeachment of a president. Some argued for the power of Congress to remove the president for “maladministration” or other open-ended terms that appeared in several state constitutions. Others, including James Madison, opposed such vague criteria, fearful that they would turn the republic into a British-style parliamentary system, in which Congress could remove a president over political differences—effectively a vote of no confidence. That, Madison argued, would be the “equivalent to tenure during pleasure of the Senate.”
Get news and analysis on politics, policy, national security and more, delivered right to your inbox
The Framers wanted an independent president who could be removed only for genuine wrongdoing. So they agreed to the criteria that became part of the Constitution: “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”
In Federalist No. 65, Alexander Hamilton elaborated on the meaning of “high” crimes: “those offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself” (emphasis added).
Hamilton didn’t say the process of impeachment is entirely political. He said the offense has to be political. He continued: “The prosecution of [such offenses] will seldom fail to agitate the passions of the whole community, and to divide it into parties, more or less friendly, or inimical, to the accused. In many cases, it will connect itself with the pre-existing factions, and will enlist all their animosities, partialities, influence, and interest on one side, or on the other; and in such cases, there will always be the greater danger, that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.”
If Hamilton’s words sound prescient, it is because he foresaw how the process of impeachment and removal could easily be exploited for political advantage, as Democrats are attempting now and Republicans tried to do when they impeached President Clinton in 1998. Hamilton was concerned that the decision to impeach and remove “the accused” be based not on “the comparative strength of parties,” but rather on “real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.” These words imply a quasi-legal process rather than an exclusively political one.
There is an inevitable political component to the decision to impeach and remove a president, but it should come into play only if the objective constitutional criteria are met. Even if a president did commit “treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors,” the House could decide on political grounds not to move forward on impeachment. The constitutional criteria are necessary for impeachment, but they do not necessitate it.
The Framers didn’t want the impeachment power to become a political weapon. That’s why they designed both procedural and substantive protections against misuse of this important legislative check on the executive. The procedural protection is the requirement of a two-thirds vote for removal, which makes it impossible to remove the president without broad support. The substantive check is the list of offenses justifying impeachment.
The words “other high crimes and misdemeanors” does accord Congress some discretion, but not as much as the rejected term “maladministration” would have. The words would seem to require criminal-like acts of a serious nature, though precisely what would suffice is anything but clear. A sitting president would almost certainly be impeached if he committed murder, despite the historical precedent that Vice President Aaron Burr was not impeached for killing Hamilton in a duel. But if a president paid hush money out of personal funds to prevent his adultery from being disclosed—as Hamilton did when he was Treasury secretary—he wouldn’t be impeached. Adultery was a felony in Hamilton’s time, but nothing Hamilton did constituted a public crime. Perjury to cover up adultery—one of the offenses for which Mr. Clinton was impeached—is a closer call, although I believe it was not impeachable.
As for the allegations against President Trump, obstruction of justice is plainly a high crime, but a president cannot commit it by exercising his constitutional authority to fire or pardon, regardless of his motive. (It would have been an impeachable offense in Mr. Clinton’s case, but the facts were disputed.) Neither is it a crime to conduct foreign policy for partisan or personal advantage—a common political sin with no limiting principle capable of being applied in a neutral manner.
The Framers, by rejecting open-ended criteria such as “maladministration” and substituting more specific and criminal-like criteria, sent a message to future generations: Impeachment should not be a political measure governed by “the comparative strength of parties.” It should be based on “the real demonstration of innocence or guilt” of “the accused.” It is left to Congress to be reasonable and conscientious in interpreting the words “treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors”—a tall order in our hyperpartisan age.
Mr. Dershowitz is a professor emeritus at Harvard Law School and author of “Defending Israel: The Story of My Relationship with My Most Challenging Client.”
2a) The Greatness of Donald Trump
His demeanor makes some of us wince. His language makes many of us uncomfortable. Presidents in democracies reflect something about the people who elect them. In some cases, as with the aptly named House of Representatives, people sometimes even vote to be reflected by an assortment of lowlifes. Ilhan Omar reflects her district, as does Rashida Tlaib, as does [O-] Cortez. Hillary lost because even Democrats were revulsed by the thought that she reflects them.
Trump, too, reflects his electorate: we who put him there. In balancing all that he comprises, we focused in November 2016 on greatness. Eight years of Obama — incompetence, weakness, economic malaise, societal decay — left us focused on restoring greatness. Thus, even Christian pastors, devout Catholic theologians, and Orthodox rabbis vigorously support Donald Trump. The free world’s last great hope is America, and she was in peril.
What about his language, some of his dishonorable private deeds, flaws in his character?
Yes, excellence of personal character is desirable. A Mike Huckabee, a Mike Pence might offer an interesting successor model in 2024 after the Democrats manage to impeach Trump into an impeccable second full term. Yet we will look back on Trump’s presidency wistfully decades hence as we today look back on the Ronald Reagan years. The man, whatever his flaws, has proven to be a great president of historic dimensions.
Those who complain about Trump’s character invariably are the same “deplorables” who voted for the lying, cheating, false-faced Hillary. They had no problem with an ethical deviant who had committed felonious spoliation of evidence, lied about her emails (yoga and wedding dresses?), lied about Benghazi (an incoherent YouTube video with few views?), lied about her very name (named for a guy who became famous only after she was born?), lied about her trips abroad (landing amid gunfire in Bosnia, when in fact she was greeted by schoolgirls presenting her flowers), lying about and defaming the women whom her husband sexually assaulted, even lying and joking in a fake Southern drawl (back when her husband was Arkansas governor) about successfully defending a guy who raped a 12-year-old girl. They likewise had no compunction voting for her better half despite his raping Juanita Broaddrick, assaulting Kathleen Willey, exposing himself to Paula Corbin Jones, manipulating a gullible Monica Lewinsky — later explaining, “because I could.”
John Kennedy in fact was an unabashed serial cheater in the White House. Lyndon Johnson was an egomaniacal narcissist who expected staff to have meetings with him while he sat on a toilet. Franklin Roosevelt was a racist and the incredibly intense Woodrow Wilson was perhaps the worst of all racists ever elected to high office. The Left has no problem with their characters or whether or not they were “presidential” — because they were leftist, “progressive” Democrats.
Even now, as the “deplorables” select their candidate to lose to Trump in 2020, do they weigh character?
Robert O’Rourke (“Man, I was born for this”) is a Scottish-Irish child of White Privilege, a hit-and-run driver who was part of a computer-hacking crowd, who masquerades as Beto the Hispanic, sort of a skateboarding Zorro.
Elizabeth Warren lied baldly for years about her lineage just to take advantage of the “affirmative action” rules that got her a job at Harvard at the expense of an authentic minority candidate. Native Americans should sioux her and without reservations. And more Elizabeth Warren biographical lies emerge every day.
Joe Biden, even if he were not a despicable crook who leveraged his vice presidency to get his son and himself personally wealthy overnight, already had staked out a long and extinguished reputation for plagiarizing speeches, fabricating stories of pseudo-heroism amid wartime peril, and just making things up. And if the measure of the man is character and whether he comports himself as “Presidential,” have we forgotten Biden’s puerile and maniacal laughing display during the Vice Presidential debate with Paul Ryan in 2012?
Meanwhile, Bernie Sanders, who now finally is finished as aorta be, endorsed Communist Russia and its bread lines that forced millions to stand for hours for a loaf of bread, and he himself probably would be home-ridden or dead now if he had his socialized medicine.
Kamala Harris slept her way shamelessly into public life as the very public consort of Willie Brown, even as Brown’s wife Blanche publicly told the media, “Listen, she may have him at the moment, but come inauguration day and he’s up there on the platform being sworn in, I’ll be the b***h holding the Bible.”
So that’s how important character is to the “deplorables.”
What makes Trump a man of historic greatness is that he wakes up every morning and continues doing his job with strength in the face of the worst character assassination imaginable, led by the Corrupt Journalist Corps. He still booms the economy. He still dares and stares down China on tariffs and trade. He still shows North Korea that he will not be hoodwinked as Bill Clinton and Obama were by promises devoid of results.
He stares down the Iranian Ayatollahs and tightens the vise, despite their bombastic threats and tactical efforts to get the weak-kneed, yellow-livered, gutless and cowardly Europeans to beg Trump to lay off. He stares down those Europeans, insisting mercilessly that they cough up the money those cheap and lazy skinflints never before would pay to support NATO.
So, unlike Obama and Arafat, no Nobel Prize for him. On Trump’s watch, Vladimir Putin no longer extends Russian hegemony into other countries. On his watch, Abu Mazen (Arafat’s henchman, Mahmoud Abbas) finally got cut off for allocating 7 percent of his annual budget — as much as $300 million, coming from monies sent by America and Europe — to support families of terrorists and to make convicted terrorists among the highest-income earners in “Palestine” under their “Pay to Slay” program.
Trump faces 24/7/365 lies, slander, and libel, and he just keeps going. He continues advancing novel approaches to solving the southern border mess that generations of Republicans, including Reagan, failed no less than did Democrats to address. With a porous border, deadly opioids have swamped us for years, brutal criminal animals like MS-13 have slithered in, and the most despicable of villains have smuggled in women and children for sex slavery. Yet, until Trump, no one took tough steps to secure the border. Then, faced with Obama judges in states of the federal appellate Ninth Circuit who routinely strike down his every lawful initiative, he has taken to filling not only two Supreme Court vacancies but also dozens of open federal appellate seats and even more federal district court benches with judges committed to the rule of law and the primacy of the Constitution.
Trump has done all this in the face of the most unbearable personal onslaught. He has had to deal with House Democrats trying to catch him on Russian collusion, Ukrainian collusion, taxes from decades earlier when he was a private citizen in the fields of casino and hotel construction and development. His lawyer, Michael Cohen, turned out to be a criminal who secretly taped clients like him. Trump gave Omarosa a chance to rehabilitate her reputation, and she betrayed that trust. He demonstrated personal loyalty by trying to repay Jeff Sessions for having been the first senator to endorse his presidential candidacy by naming him attorney general, and that loyalty backfired.
The service, brilliance, and true grit of William Barr demonstrates what that job entails in this unfortunate era of personal destruction, and Sen. Sessions was ill-suited for that role. Trump allowed Paul Ryan to gain his misplaced trust on how and when to push for funding a southern border wall. He initially deferred to Republican insiders by appointing Reince Priebus his chief of staff and Sean Spicer his spokesperson until he gained the experience to make better choices.
His first Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, seemed to him uniquely suited to deal with Putin, but Mike Pompeo’s tenure as Tillerson’s successor shows the difference between the early mistake of a newcomer to the game and the lessons Trump has learned on the job.
Most of all, Trump has survived and remained unbowed. Kathy the CNN comedienne thought it would be a laugh to hold a bloodied decapitated head depicted like the president’s. Madonna spoke publicly about blowing up the White House. A public Shakespeare Festival in Manhattan staged a suggestive assassination. Yet he goes on, even stronger.
The Democrats try to tie up his entire administration with one bogus investigation after another, subpoenaing family, friends, and government officials trying to get work done. And yet he goes on.
He recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, moves the American embassy there from Tel Aviv, recognizes Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan Heights, throws the PLO out of Washington, pulls the U.S. out of the phony UN “Human Rights Council,” pulls the U.S. out of the disastrous Iran Deal, pulls the U.S. out of the self-destructive “Paris Climate Accords,” stops the nonsensical Trans-Pacific Partnership, brings jobs back to America, secures the nation’s aluminum and steel industries, reduces unemployment to its lowest in 50 years at 3.5 percent and likewise reduces Black and Hispanic unemployment to their all-time lows.
He opened new vistas in hydraulic fracturing in Alaska and expanded energy production in other ways that transmogrified America into so great a net exporter of energy that our economy is not impacted when half of Saudi Arabia’s oil production is closed down. He fights Democrat initiatives to extend abortion into the ninth month and even their policies to make newly born babies “comfortable” while mother and doctor decide whether or not to kill the newborn.
Nothing breaks him. Not libel and not slander. Not accusations by the likes of John Brennan, who voted for communist Gus Hall to be president, that this most patriotic of Americans is a traitor. Not endless state initiatives to keep him off ballots. Not attacks on his wife, his daughter, even the public mocking of his youngest boy. He wakes up every day and does his job with determination and gusto. At press conferences with world leaders, as the Corrupt Journalist Corps strike at him with embarrassing questions while his foreign visitors look on awkwardly, he stands his ground. He does not give an inch. He hits back twice as hard as they do.
Most of us never have had a job in which the personal attacks, the daily venom, create a pervasive and severely toxic atmosphere. But some of us have. Some people in those situations are driven to suicide. Others sustain breakdowns or get so flummoxed daily that they make severe mistakes or burn out. Others are driven to resign. But Donald Trump feeds off it and responds by campaigning vigorously and energetically for reelection.
The great irony is that because he is such a lifelong dealmaker, odds are that, if the Democrats had treated him with a modicum of civility instead of “Resistance,” he would have made “deals” with them that would have infuriated the ideological conservatives among us who were sick and tired of one Bush betrayal after another. He might have appointed his sister to the U.S. Supreme Court. He might have made a deal with Planned Parenthood. But they would not let him. They announced The Resistance from day one, thinking that a bunch of political degenerates like Pelosi, Schumer, [O-] Cortez, Tlaib, Nadler, Omar, Schiff, and Maxine Waters could break him.
They underestimated what history will declare: that Donald Trump actually was one of our greatest presidents, one who achieved more during his two terms than did most who preceded him, including Ronald Reagan.
Rabbi Dov Fischer, Esq., a high-stakes litigation attorney of more than twenty-five years and an adjunct professor of law of more than fifteen years, is rabbi of Young Israel of Orange County, California. His legal career has included serving as Chief Articles Editor of UCLA Law Review, clerking for the Hon. Danny J. Boggs in the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, and then litigating at three of America’s most prominent law firms: JonesDay, Akin Gump, and Baker & Hostetler. In his rabbinical career, Rabbi Fischer has served several terms on the Executive Committee of the Rabbinical Council of America, is Senior Rabbinic Fellow at the Coalition for Jewish Values, has been Vice President of Zionist Organization of America, and has served on regional boards of the American Jewish Committee, B’nai Brith Hillel, and several others. His writings on contemporary political issues have appeared over the years in the Wall Street Journal, the Los Angeles Times, the Jerusalem Post, National Review, American Greatness, The Weekly Standard, and in Jewish media in American and in Israel. A winner of an American Jurisprudence Award in Professional Legal Ethics, Rabbi Fischer also is the author of two books, including General Sharon’s War Against Time Magazine, which covered the Israeli General’s 1980s landmark libel suit.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3)
3)
Rivlin unlikely to grant Netanyahu more time to form government: report
Mandate to scrape together Knesset majority likely to pass to Blue and White chief Benny Gantz in less than two weeks, unsourced TV report says
President Reuven Rivlin is not expected to grant Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu additional time to form a governing coalition and will likely pass the mandate to Blue and White party leader Benny Gantz, Channel 12 News reported on Friday.
As of Friday, Netanyahu had 12 days left to try to scrape together a Knesset majority after Rivlin tasked him with forming a government on September 25. If Netanyahu fails, Gantz will then be granted 28 days to try himself, the unsourced report said.
Rivlin has the option of extending Netanyahu’s mandate by 14 days, which he did after the previous round of elections in April.
Shortly after Rivlin tasked him with forming a Knesset majority, Netanyahu said he was considering returning the mandate, but has not done so. He may be hoping to take advantage of developments in his hearings with Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit, if, for example, the bribery charge against him is reduced to breach of trust, the report said.
Despite his legal woes — he is facing pending corruption charges in three cases — Netanyahu was tasked by Rivlin with trying to form a government based on the strength of his pact with right-wing and ultra-Orthodox parties to negotiate as a bloc of 55 MKs. Gantz heads a bloc of 54 MKs from the center, left and Arab parties, but the 10 Arab MKs in that group would not join a Gantz-led coalition. Neither candidate has a clear path to a 61-strong Knesset majority without the other.
Talks between Netanyahu’s Likud party and Blue and White aimed at forming a unity government have gone nowhere.
On Thursday sources from both Blue and White and Likud denounced Yisrael Beytenu party leader Avigdor Liberman’s plan, unveiled the previous night, to form a unity government, calling his proposal an unrealistic, feeble attempt to break the ongoing deadlock in talks.
Officials from both parties told The Times of Israel that Liberman’s “unity plan” — which would involve Gantz giving up on going first in a rotation deal for the premiership and Netanyahu giving up his bloc of right-wing parties — states the obvious without offering any new ideas.
“We know what the sticking points are; we don’t need Liberman to tell us,” one MK from Blue and White said. “It’s useless to say these are the issues that need to be resolved. You need to come up with creative solutions if you really want to solve anything.”
Another Blue and White party official speculated that the purpose of the Yisrael Beytenu chief’s proposal was “to remind people that he’s here” — not to help the two sides reach an agreement.
“He wants to help one person: Avigdor Liberman. If he were serious then he would present something serious,” they said.
Likud officials, who have insisted that the party also represent the right-wing parties, minus Yisrael Beytenu, and ultra-Orthodox factions in negotiations – were similarly unimpressed.
“The issue is not that we are negotiating as a bloc,” one Likud official said. “The issue is that [Blue and White] won’t accept Netanyahu.”
In a post on Facebook Wednesday night, Liberman suggested that as a first step, representatives of the two major parties plus his own get together to hash out the guiding principles of a future unity government.
“First and foremost we have to clearly define all the issues on the agenda — security, economy, social and church and state,” he wrote.
Liberman said that should such an agreement be reached, they should then adopt President Reuven Rivlin’s proposal for a power-sharing compromise.
Rivlin had suggested a unity government in which power would be equally divided and Netanyahu and Gantz would each serve two years as prime minister. Rivlin implied, but did not specify, that Netanyahu would take an open-ended leave of absence if he is indicted in one or more of the probes in which he faces charges. Under the arrangement set out by Rivlin, Gantz, as “interim prime minister” in such a scenario, would enjoy all prime ministerial authority.
A third stage proposed by Liberman would see the new government pass the budget and a multi-year defense plan.
It would then, in the fourth stage, allow other parties to join the coalition if they agreed to the government’s guiding principles, Liberman said.
Liberman insisted that his party would not join a narrow right-wing or center-left government.
The Likud party immediately rejected Liberman’s proposal, saying he had “not brought anything new,” while Blue and White welcomed it in an official statement, saying it saw his party as a prospective coalition partner, though by the next morning MKs were decidedly less enthusiastic.
Likud and Blue and White have accused each other of intransigence in the coalition talks and claimed that the other side was pushing the country toward an unprecedented third election in under a year
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
4)
The FBI Is Lucky to Have William Barr
By Thomas J. Baker
Attorney General William Barr has come under harsh attack from Democrats, the media and former officials such as John Brennan, who ran the Central Intelligence Agency under Barack Obama. I served during Mr. Barr’s first stint as attorney general from 1991-93 and am glad he’s back. The bureau was let down by poor leadership under former Director James Comey. It was led down a rabbit hole into a baseless investigation of a presidential campaign, and its reputation has been tarnished by headquarters sycophants. Mr. Barr has the character and experience to get the bureau back on track.
On Aug. 21, 1991, 121 prisoners rioted at the Talladega Federal Correctional Institution in Alabama and took eight men and three women hostage. The situation dragged on for 10 days. FBI management invited Mr. Barr, who’d been acting attorney general for three days, to their command post. There he made the tough call authorizing the Hostage Rescue Team to retake the prison—which it did, with no casualties. When the smoke cleared, President George H.W. Bush called to say that he’d nominate Mr. Barr to be the permanent attorney general. Mr. Barr showed no fear. That became his reputation among agents.
He continues to live up to it. A case in point is the explosive issue of police killings of black men. The decision whether to bring civil-rights charges against a New York police officer for the July 2014 death of Eric Garner had hung fire for years. As in any encounter in which a white officer’s actions lead to a black man’s death, there was a sustained cry for action against the officer. Mr. Barr finally made the tough call and took the heat. There will be no federal civil-rights case.
The current opposition to Mr. Barr centers on his effort to learn the predicate—if there was one—for the unprecedented investigation into a U.S. presidential campaign. Messrs. Comey and Brennan have repeatedly and publicly questioned Mr. Barr’s motives. They and their media allies warn that declassifying documents from the inquiry would set a dangerous precedent. Mr. Barr shows no signs of backing down.
He is also looking at the culture of political correctness that has caused the FBI and other agencies to slink away from a frank discussion of the Islamist threat. This has gone far beyond the knee-jerk PC of “watch your words.” During the Robert Mueller and Comey years it allowed advocacy groups like the Council on American-Islamic Relations to get their noses under the FBI tent.
Those who now work under Mr. Barr speak of him the same way we did during his first tour: “He knows no fear.” His willingness to confront what went wrong in the collusion investigation will lead to changes in how the FBI handles politically sensitive investigations in the future. The process of applying for Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court warrants will be reformed.
He formed a close bond with bureau management during his first tour. He is doing the work that needs to be done to restore the bureau’s reputation. Today’s FBI is lucky to have Mr. Barr as attorney general.
Mr. Baker is a retired FBI special agent and legal attaché.
4a)
On Aug. 21, 1991, 121 prisoners rioted at the Talladega Federal Correctional Institution in Alabama and took eight men and three women hostage. The situation dragged on for 10 days. FBI management invited Mr. Barr, who’d been acting attorney general for three days, to their command post. There he made the tough call authorizing the Hostage Rescue Team to retake the prison—which it did, with no casualties. When the smoke cleared, President George H.W. Bush called to say that he’d nominate Mr. Barr to be the permanent attorney general. Mr. Barr showed no fear. That became his reputation among agents.
He continues to live up to it. A case in point is the explosive issue of police killings of black men. The decision whether to bring civil-rights charges against a New York police officer for the July 2014 death of Eric Garner had hung fire for years. As in any encounter in which a white officer’s actions lead to a black man’s death, there was a sustained cry for action against the officer. Mr. Barr finally made the tough call and took the heat. There will be no federal civil-rights case.
The current opposition to Mr. Barr centers on his effort to learn the predicate—if there was one—for the unprecedented investigation into a U.S. presidential campaign. Messrs. Comey and Brennan have repeatedly and publicly questioned Mr. Barr’s motives. They and their media allies warn that declassifying documents from the inquiry would set a dangerous precedent. Mr. Barr shows no signs of backing down.
He is also looking at the culture of political correctness that has caused the FBI and other agencies to slink away from a frank discussion of the Islamist threat. This has gone far beyond the knee-jerk PC of “watch your words.” During the Robert Mueller and Comey years it allowed advocacy groups like the Council on American-Islamic Relations to get their noses under the FBI tent.
Those who now work under Mr. Barr speak of him the same way we did during his first tour: “He knows no fear.” His willingness to confront what went wrong in the collusion investigation will lead to changes in how the FBI handles politically sensitive investigations in the future. The process of applying for Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court warrants will be reformed.
He formed a close bond with bureau management during his first tour. He is doing the work that needs to be done to restore the bureau’s reputation. Today’s FBI is lucky to have Mr. Barr as attorney general.
Mr. Baker is a retired FBI special agent and legal attaché.
4a)
Exclusive— Stephen Miller Exposes the Deep State: ‘A Collection of Permanent Bureaucrats Enmeshed Inside the Federal Government’
Stephen Miller, a senior adviser to President Donald Trump, joined Breitbart News Sunday on SiriusXM 125 the Patriot Channel this weekend to expose the deep state: forces he said are driving the effort by Democrats to proceed with impeachment against the president.
“The attempt at impeachment is best understood as a legislative coup against a democratically elected president, and the radical leftists in Congress are working arm-in-arm with the deep state saboteurs and their allies in the media in order to try to effectuate this illegal coup,” Miller said.
“Although rest assured, they will fail,” he continued. “The deep state is a collection of permanent bureaucrats enmeshed inside the federal government who can’t be fired or removed — at least historically, have not been able to be — because of misguided civil service laws. They believe they know better than you, and your listeners, and the voters how the country ought to be run. At this moment in time, the deep state has a knife aimed at the heart of American democracy, and that’s what you’re seeing playing across your TV screens and newspapers pages and online, with these so-called whistleblowers, who are, of course, in fact, angry hate-filled rage-driven bureaucrats determined to take down the President of the United States and illicitly and improperly using the Whistleblower Protection Act in order to effectuate their designs.”
Miller continued, “One of the gravest threats that we face today — and I can’t emphasize this enough — to our republican form of government is the unelected deep state, and I’ll explain what I mean by that. The Constitution of the United States, Article II, states very clearly that, and this is a quote, ‘The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.’ What that means is that the whole executive power is vested in one democratically elected person: the president. The president, who is accountable to the voters — the president, who is accountable to the American people, holds and wields the executive power. Every other person in the federal government in the executive branch is an extension of his authority, is acting as an extension of his authority delegated to them. They have no independent authority. So when a deep state bureaucrat says, ‘I don’t want Donald Trump to be president. I don’t want to effectuate his policies. I don’t want to carry out his agenda, so I will do the opposite,’ they’re violating the Constitution and they’re taking away the power of the American people to elect who heads the executive branch and what policies they implement.”
Miller said what Trump is facing would be the equivalent of a member of Congress having disloyal staff forced on them from their predecessors — people working to undermine that member’s wishes on a daily basis.
“Imagine, as an example, if a U.S. senator or congressman was elected but was saddled with staff from the previous senator or congressman that worked against them night and day to block them from carrying out the legislative agenda they campaigned on,” Miller said. “Would anybody ever tolerate that? This is the same thing happening in the executive branch, now, but played across thousands of people seated throughout the federal government, and I’ve seen this firsthand.”
Miller said in his years at President Trump’s side, he has seen up close and personal what “deep state saboteurs” do when they disagree with Trump’s policies.
“When we hold interagency briefings, and you’ll invite career folks on, like, for example, working on an issue like, say, refugee policy, and if they don’t like the direction you’re taking, they will leak and spin and lie about the contents of your meetings,” Miller said. “They’ll take it to the Washington Post and the New York Times and to MSNBC. They’ll share private documents, they’ll share private emails, they’ll share private correspondence, and then they’ll spin and fabricate and lie to create their desired narrative to try to steer policy in the direction they want to steer it in, and the most dangerous expression of this — of course, we’ve seen — has been in the intelligence community, which is amassed with awesome power, awesome capabilities, and they’re directing that and wielding that — in some cases — against a duly-elected President of the United States of America, which is a form of sabotage that should terrify everyday American citizens. That is now the situation we find ourselves in.”
Miller continued by noting that the reason these actors continue to attempt to undermine Trump is because Trump has completely upended the failures of both major political parties over the past several decades in Washington.
“The last point I’ll make about this is the why,” Miller said. “Why? Because this president dared to disrupt two-party betrayal of the American people over many decades: betrayal on trade, betrayal on China, betrayal on foreign policy, betrayal on our southern border, betrayal on our economy, decade after decade, year after year, administration after administration. This president dared to stand up to defy that betrayal — was elected to end that betrayal — but the people who profited like parasites off of that betrayal are now the ones trying to prevent him from executing the agenda that the American people installed him to execute. That’s the situation we find ourselves in today.”
From there, Miller pointed to several specific examples of saboteurs before these current so-called whistleblowers who used their positions in government to attempt to undermine Trump’s policies. At the very beginning of the administration was Sally Yates, the acting attorney general of the United States during the earliest days of the Trump administration, who refused to enact the lawful order of the travel ban at the beginning of the administration. Trump fired her as a result and then, later, the travel ban was implemented — and upheld as lawful by the U.S. Supreme Court.
“Sally Yates, yeah, Sally Yates, let’s hit on that,” Miller said. “Sally Yates refused to carry out a lawful order of the president. And then she received an email — this was from back in reference to the travel ban case — she received an email from Andrew Weissman who later found himself on Mueller’s team telling her something to the effect of ‘I’ve never been more proud of you than I am today.’ That’s not an exact quote but it’s the general spirit of it — that gives you some insight into how the deep state operates.”
Miller noted that there are millions of people who work for the federal government and the vast majority of them do their job and do it well. But then there are people like Peter Strzok, the now-former FBI agent whose text messages with Lisa Page — his lover and an FBI attorney — demonstrated that the two of them were part of a broader effort to misuse the federal government perches from which they sat to attempt to create an “insurance policy” against Trump to hurt him.
“Yes, there are millions of people who are employed by the federal government and are contracted with the federal government, and enormous numbers of them are extremely patriotic people, but we also know that in the Beltway of Washington, DC, in the Maryland-Virginia area that federal employees tilt overwhelmingly left, and while a good number of them are able to set aside their personal feelings to carry out their jobs, there is quite a number of them who are not so willing, and those of them who have great power have the potential to do extraordinary damage, and exhibit A in this case is Peter Strzok,” Miller said. “Look at the emails and text messages Peter Strzok was sending. And, by the way, those were only the emails and text messages he was sending on his government device. The person at the center of the Clinton investigation and the 2016 investigation — on his government device — was texting hateful thoughts — terrible plots — against the president and the president’s supporters.”
If it was not for those text messages becoming public, Strzok would have gone on working for the FBI and probably would have continued working for Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team. He was removed for bias when those messages were revealed, and Miller makes the case that there are many more like him throughout the government.
“To the point about it being a deep state, who in America knew who Peter Strzok was before the text messages came out?” Miller said. “Somebody that labored behind closed doors, probably worked in secret without ever giving a sign to anyone around him but secretly working against this president, only looping in the people that he felt needed to know, now exposed to the world. But how many more Peter Strzoks are there throughout this government — throughout the intelligence community — that are doing the exact same thing that he’s doing, yet unknown and undetected? We can be certain that a few of them now are filing themselves as whistleblowers.”
Now that there are anonymous so-called “whistleblowers” from that same deep state who have — without revealing their identity while pushing false allegations against the president — sparked impeachment proceedings against the president, Miller said it is an outrage.
“It violates every notion of due process at the center of the American system of government and based upon, by the way, a conversation that we can now all read for ourselves — that we can now all see for ourselves — in an unprecedented show of transparency,” Miller said. “The president was doing nothing more than carrying out his lawful obligation as president to root out and uncover corruption, duty to faithfully execute the laws of the United States including the laws against corrupt practices and now is facing a Pelosi-led legislative coup. It’s beyond comprehension.”
To fight back against this, Miller called on all Americans to stand with President Trump.
“What people need to do is they need to support our president,” Miller said. “The battle lines are drawn. Support our president. And, tell your members of Congress that they need to support our president too. That is the single most important thing you can do.”
Miller also predicted a “Tsunami-sized backlash against the Democrats” for jumping the gun on impeachment and moving forward without the transcript or the complaint, both of which prove the president’s innocence of the claims against him.
“Adam Schiff should not be allowed in polite society,” Miller said. “He should be relegated to wearing a tin-foil hat. He was the lead proponent of this ludicrous Russia conspiracy theory against our president that has been so systematically debunked, and dismantled, and disproven at every turn but again pushed from the beginning by permanent bureaucrats and their Democrat co-conspirators. Again, the situation is indeed a grave one — but there will be a tremendous backlash against the Democrats. But understand this, for the Democrats, they want to stop this president because they want to stop his policies. They want to force back onto you open borders. They want to subjugate you under a regulatory regime that crushes your liberties. They want to enmesh in foreign conflicts all around the world. And they want to keep us in a state of economic serfdom to foreign countries trade-cheating and mercantilist policies. So, this is about the sovereignty, security, independence, and freedom of the American people.”
More from Miller’s exclusive interview with Breitbart News Sunday is forthcoming.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
“The attempt at impeachment is best understood as a legislative coup against a democratically elected president, and the radical leftists in Congress are working arm-in-arm with the deep state saboteurs and their allies in the media in order to try to effectuate this illegal coup,” Miller said.
Miller continued, “One of the gravest threats that we face today — and I can’t emphasize this enough — to our republican form of government is the unelected deep state, and I’ll explain what I mean by that. The Constitution of the United States, Article II, states very clearly that, and this is a quote, ‘The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.’ What that means is that the whole executive power is vested in one democratically elected person: the president. The president, who is accountable to the voters — the president, who is accountable to the American people, holds and wields the executive power. Every other person in the federal government in the executive branch is an extension of his authority, is acting as an extension of his authority delegated to them. They have no independent authority. So when a deep state bureaucrat says, ‘I don’t want Donald Trump to be president. I don’t want to effectuate his policies. I don’t want to carry out his agenda, so I will do the opposite,’ they’re violating the Constitution and they’re taking away the power of the American people to elect who heads the executive branch and what policies they implement.”
Miller said what Trump is facing would be the equivalent of a member of Congress having disloyal staff forced on them from their predecessors — people working to undermine that member’s wishes on a daily basis.
“Imagine, as an example, if a U.S. senator or congressman was elected but was saddled with staff from the previous senator or congressman that worked against them night and day to block them from carrying out the legislative agenda they campaigned on,” Miller said. “Would anybody ever tolerate that? This is the same thing happening in the executive branch, now, but played across thousands of people seated throughout the federal government, and I’ve seen this firsthand.”
Miller said in his years at President Trump’s side, he has seen up close and personal what “deep state saboteurs” do when they disagree with Trump’s policies.
“When we hold interagency briefings, and you’ll invite career folks on, like, for example, working on an issue like, say, refugee policy, and if they don’t like the direction you’re taking, they will leak and spin and lie about the contents of your meetings,” Miller said. “They’ll take it to the Washington Post and the New York Times and to MSNBC. They’ll share private documents, they’ll share private emails, they’ll share private correspondence, and then they’ll spin and fabricate and lie to create their desired narrative to try to steer policy in the direction they want to steer it in, and the most dangerous expression of this — of course, we’ve seen — has been in the intelligence community, which is amassed with awesome power, awesome capabilities, and they’re directing that and wielding that — in some cases — against a duly-elected President of the United States of America, which is a form of sabotage that should terrify everyday American citizens. That is now the situation we find ourselves in.”
Miller continued by noting that the reason these actors continue to attempt to undermine Trump is because Trump has completely upended the failures of both major political parties over the past several decades in Washington.
“The last point I’ll make about this is the why,” Miller said. “Why? Because this president dared to disrupt two-party betrayal of the American people over many decades: betrayal on trade, betrayal on China, betrayal on foreign policy, betrayal on our southern border, betrayal on our economy, decade after decade, year after year, administration after administration. This president dared to stand up to defy that betrayal — was elected to end that betrayal — but the people who profited like parasites off of that betrayal are now the ones trying to prevent him from executing the agenda that the American people installed him to execute. That’s the situation we find ourselves in today.”
From there, Miller pointed to several specific examples of saboteurs before these current so-called whistleblowers who used their positions in government to attempt to undermine Trump’s policies. At the very beginning of the administration was Sally Yates, the acting attorney general of the United States during the earliest days of the Trump administration, who refused to enact the lawful order of the travel ban at the beginning of the administration. Trump fired her as a result and then, later, the travel ban was implemented — and upheld as lawful by the U.S. Supreme Court.
“Sally Yates, yeah, Sally Yates, let’s hit on that,” Miller said. “Sally Yates refused to carry out a lawful order of the president. And then she received an email — this was from back in reference to the travel ban case — she received an email from Andrew Weissman who later found himself on Mueller’s team telling her something to the effect of ‘I’ve never been more proud of you than I am today.’ That’s not an exact quote but it’s the general spirit of it — that gives you some insight into how the deep state operates.”
Miller noted that there are millions of people who work for the federal government and the vast majority of them do their job and do it well. But then there are people like Peter Strzok, the now-former FBI agent whose text messages with Lisa Page — his lover and an FBI attorney — demonstrated that the two of them were part of a broader effort to misuse the federal government perches from which they sat to attempt to create an “insurance policy” against Trump to hurt him.
“Yes, there are millions of people who are employed by the federal government and are contracted with the federal government, and enormous numbers of them are extremely patriotic people, but we also know that in the Beltway of Washington, DC, in the Maryland-Virginia area that federal employees tilt overwhelmingly left, and while a good number of them are able to set aside their personal feelings to carry out their jobs, there is quite a number of them who are not so willing, and those of them who have great power have the potential to do extraordinary damage, and exhibit A in this case is Peter Strzok,” Miller said. “Look at the emails and text messages Peter Strzok was sending. And, by the way, those were only the emails and text messages he was sending on his government device. The person at the center of the Clinton investigation and the 2016 investigation — on his government device — was texting hateful thoughts — terrible plots — against the president and the president’s supporters.”
If it was not for those text messages becoming public, Strzok would have gone on working for the FBI and probably would have continued working for Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team. He was removed for bias when those messages were revealed, and Miller makes the case that there are many more like him throughout the government.
“To the point about it being a deep state, who in America knew who Peter Strzok was before the text messages came out?” Miller said. “Somebody that labored behind closed doors, probably worked in secret without ever giving a sign to anyone around him but secretly working against this president, only looping in the people that he felt needed to know, now exposed to the world. But how many more Peter Strzoks are there throughout this government — throughout the intelligence community — that are doing the exact same thing that he’s doing, yet unknown and undetected? We can be certain that a few of them now are filing themselves as whistleblowers.”
Now that there are anonymous so-called “whistleblowers” from that same deep state who have — without revealing their identity while pushing false allegations against the president — sparked impeachment proceedings against the president, Miller said it is an outrage.
“It violates every notion of due process at the center of the American system of government and based upon, by the way, a conversation that we can now all read for ourselves — that we can now all see for ourselves — in an unprecedented show of transparency,” Miller said. “The president was doing nothing more than carrying out his lawful obligation as president to root out and uncover corruption, duty to faithfully execute the laws of the United States including the laws against corrupt practices and now is facing a Pelosi-led legislative coup. It’s beyond comprehension.”
To fight back against this, Miller called on all Americans to stand with President Trump.
“What people need to do is they need to support our president,” Miller said. “The battle lines are drawn. Support our president. And, tell your members of Congress that they need to support our president too. That is the single most important thing you can do.”
Miller also predicted a “Tsunami-sized backlash against the Democrats” for jumping the gun on impeachment and moving forward without the transcript or the complaint, both of which prove the president’s innocence of the claims against him.
“Adam Schiff should not be allowed in polite society,” Miller said. “He should be relegated to wearing a tin-foil hat. He was the lead proponent of this ludicrous Russia conspiracy theory against our president that has been so systematically debunked, and dismantled, and disproven at every turn but again pushed from the beginning by permanent bureaucrats and their Democrat co-conspirators. Again, the situation is indeed a grave one — but there will be a tremendous backlash against the Democrats. But understand this, for the Democrats, they want to stop this president because they want to stop his policies. They want to force back onto you open borders. They want to subjugate you under a regulatory regime that crushes your liberties. They want to enmesh in foreign conflicts all around the world. And they want to keep us in a state of economic serfdom to foreign countries trade-cheating and mercantilist policies. So, this is about the sovereignty, security, independence, and freedom of the American people.”
More from Miller’s exclusive interview with Breitbart News Sunday is forthcoming.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
5)
Judge Jeanine Pirro EXPOSES The TRUTH About The Whistleblower
She is absolutely right about this…
Recently on “Fox & Friends,” network host Jeanine Pirro gave her opinion about the anonymous whistleblower complaint against President Trump’s phone call with Ukraine’s president.
Pirro insisted that the whistleblower wanting to only testify in private was further evidence that the CIA was “attempting a coup against” Trump.
“Who is this guy?” Pirro questioned. “Number one, he is a CIA person, OK? What we’re experiencing right now is the CIA, an intelligence agency, attempting a coup against the United States president. And that is what is going on here. This is intelligence agencies trying to take out a president.”
She went on to say, “The bottom line is, who is he afraid of? They always try to make themselves victims. Everybody’s a victim. You know, I was a prosecutor for 150 years. Every criminal I ever tried was a victim. You’re not a victim. You need to come out. You know, Barack Obama, I was just reading this morning, he fired whistleblowers. Now in this administration, we’re not even entitled to know who they are.”
Pirro attacked the whistleblower, insisting that the complaint was “nothing more than hearsay.”
“The best evidence is the transcript,” she said. “The president was open, he was willing and transparent.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No comments:
Post a Comment