‘They only want to impeach me because they know they can’t win in 2020…’
Editors Note: This article contains profanity.
(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) It would take an awful lot of disgraceful behavior to fill the shoes of former Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., the long-serving octogenarian congressman who resigned in 2017 amid shocking sexual harassment and misconduct allegations.
But his successor, Rashida Tlaib, seems poised to do just that—and is already off to a strong start.
In her first day on the job, Tlaib help set the tone for the 116th Congress and candidly revealed the Democratic majority’s chief legislative agenda by declaring of President Donald Trump, “[W]e’re gonna impeach the motherf***er.”
Tlaib was addressing a gathering of liberal activists with the group Move On when she made the remarks, according to Mediaite.
Prior to making the comments, she had spoken about the meaningfulness of being a role-model for young girls. “I cannot wait to inspire the next generation,” she said.
She also told the George Soros-backed organization, “For me it’s really about taking down these corporate billionaires.”
The impeachment remark was one of many such indicators from House Democrats, including newly elevated Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who, despite previous comments downplaying the possibility of partisan impeachment efforts, refused on Thursday to rule it out.
The drumbeat elicited a response from Trump, who said in a pair of tweets, “They only want to impeach me because they know they can’t win in 2020, too much success!”
How do you impeach a president who has won perhaps the greatest election of all time, done nothing wrong (no Collusion with Russia, it was the Dems that Colluded), had the most successful first two years of any president, and is the most popular Republican in party history 93%?
Tlaib, a former state representative, ran with no significant opposition in Michigan’s 13th District, comprising the predominantly African–American outskirts of Detroit, and became the first Palestinian–American elected to Congress, as well as one of the first Muslim women. She was sworn in Thursday on Thomas Jefferson’s personal copy of the Quran.
However, those historic milestones in identity politics have been eclipsed by the negative press she has received for anti-Semitic rhetoric—as well as her virulent, often obscene attacks on Trump.
On the day after Christmas, Tlaib coarsely criticized the president over the death of a Guatemalan child in custody at the U.S.–Mexico border.
In fact, she credited Trump’s election with being a “bat-signal” that caused her to run and first rose to prominence after heckling Trump at a rally, according to a CNN interview following her primary victory.
‘It took nearly no time at all for these new members to succumb to the pressure from D.C. Democrats and break their promise…’
Nancy Pelosi/IMAGE: CNN via Youtube
(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) Although increasingly befuddled at times in recent years, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D.-Calif., proved shrewd enough to deftly navigate the political waters into a reprise role as the country’s third-most powerful person.
The 69-year-old San Francisco congresswoman not only garnered the surprise support of President Donald Trump—despite a tooth-and-nail battle over border-wall funding—in her bid to become speaker of the House, but she also was able to stave off challenges from the far-left by negotiating a package of rules changes and leadership positions in the new Congress.
In the end, 19 newly elected Democrats who made campaign pledges to oppose Pelosi’s push for speaker fell in line for the final tally, enabling Pelosi to defeat GOP Rep. Kevin McCarthy and claim the speaker’s gavel.
The conservative America Rising PAC made hay of their capitulation in a message to supporters. “Their constituents will be less than pleased to learn it took nearly no time at all for these new members to succumb to the pressure from D.C. Democrats and break their promise.”
Those who flip-flopped on their opposition to Pelosi were:
Two others who abstained by voting “present” were Elissa Slotkin and Jeff Van Drew.
America Rising also produced a short video montage showing the new congresspeople making their pledges.
‘In the history of American politics, there has never been a gubernatorial candidate more embroiled in political scandal and questionable financial dealings than Terry McAuliffe…’
(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) Those hoping the Clinton era ended with the 2016 election may have to wait a little longer.
Even if on-again, off-again contender Hillary Clinton ultimately decides not to try for a third time, one of the Clintons’ closest allies, former Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, confirmed on Sunday what many have long assumed.
The one-time fundraiser and all-around henchman for the Clintons told Dana Bash on CNN’s “State of the Union” that he now has his own aspirations for the Oval Office—not to mention the White House’s lucrative Lincoln Bedroom.
“I’m obviously looking at it,” McAuliffe said. “I’ve got time. I’ve got a lot of great relationships. I have 40 years of working for this party.”
‘Sharp Elbows’
Although McAuliffe declined to outright declare his candidacy, he offered a preview of his sales pitch, touting his executive experience as Virginia governor, as well as his extensive Rolodex from previous stints as a fundraiser and chair of the Democratic National Committee.
“People want politicians to get results,” he said. “That’s why I think governors are always important. We have to balance budgets. We have to build roads. We have to clean the roads. We have to fund education. Very results-oriented.”
However, McAuliffe’s long record of involvement in Democratic politics may also be a liability.
Although he—and others in the media echo chamber—will no doubt emphasize his ability to turn a previously red state into solid-blue territory and attempt to paint him as a fiscally conservative moderate, McAuliffe is far from it.
Even The Washington Post in analyzing his CNN ‘audition tape’ seemed to acknowledge that among McAuliffe’s biggest assets to the party was his bag of dirty tricks. “Democrats may not be keen on McAuliffe—for a host of good reasons,” it said. “But they need to embrace his message: optimism, realism and a couple of sharp elbows.”
A Slimy Legacy
As with all things Clinton-related, McAuliffe’s main legacy as Virginia governor was the slimy residue he left behind.
Many of his top priorities, in fact, focused on securing the state for Clinton during the 2016 race, if not serving his own personal interests.
For McAuliffe, who narrowly won in Virginia by a margin of only 56,000 votes—his lead coming, suspiciously, from a single county in the twilight hours of the vote tabulation—the extra cushion of Democratic voters from the prison-to-polling-station pipeline was merely one piece of the puzzle.
Despite clear evidence of thousands of illegal immigrants casting ballots in the state, he also repeatedly vetoed voter reform efforts and pressured jurisdictions not to cooperate with watchdog groups seeking to inspect the tainted voter rolls.
And he was at the heart of the FBI’s bias scandal, functioning as a middleman for the Clintons once again by providing $675,288 in payments through political action committees to fund the 2015 state Senate campaign of Jill McCabe while her husband, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, was helping oversee the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server.
How can FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, the man in charge, along with leakin’ James Comey, of the Phony Hillary Clinton investigation (including her 33,000 illegally deleted emails) be given $700,000 for wife’s campaign by Clinton Puppets during investigation?
Another advantage of McAuliffe’s in securing the Virginia governor’s mansion was the influx of dark money.
“In the history of American politics, there has never been a gubernatorial candidate more embroiled in political scandal and questionable financial dealings than Terry McAuliffe,” said Chris LaCivita, a strategist for McAuliffe’s GOP opponent, Ken Cuccinelli.
With help from billionaire donors including Tom Steyer and Michael Bloomberg, McAuliffe was able to raise and spend nearly twice that of Cuccinelli in the Virginia race.
But with both Steyer and Bloomberg eyeing their own 2020 presidential bids, McAuliffe may instead have to put in some calls to his old friends in China.
If McAuliffe were to take on Trump, though, his days as a Clinton bundler and his partnerships with foreign nationals would surely be scrutinized.
McAuliffe defended the Clintons’ suspicious fundraising activity in a 2015 interview with The Washington Post: “If the biggest attack on Hillary’s going to be that she raised too much money for her charity, okay, I’ll take that,” he said. “No one’s alleging anything beyond that she raised money and people gave her money and foreign governments gave her money. At the end of the day, that’s fine. It went to a charity. It helped a lot of people.”
Since then, however, many other allegations against the Clinton Foundation have cropped up. Most recently, a hearing by the House Judiciary and Oversight committees revealed that the Clintons frequently blurred the lines between their charity and personal interests, and likely used foundation money given by foreign entities during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of State to effectively operate an unregulated slush fund for her 2016 campaign.
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton, testifying at the congressional hearing, said, “There’s no wall of separation between the Clinton Foundation and the Department of State. It’s so bad that the crown prince [of Saudi Arabia] couldn’t get a meeting with Mrs. Clinton through the State Department, so he went to the Clinton Foundation.”
Chinagate
Bill & Hillary Clinton/IMAGE: YouTube
When it comes to shady foreign dealings, the Clinton Foundation was but the tip of the iceberg for McAuliffe.
McAuliffe worked closely with Loral Space and Communications, a company that lobbied on behalf of the Chinese—and whose chairman, Bernard Schwartz, was a top Democratic donor.
While nearly 100 people fled the country or took the Fifth in the aftermath—and Commerce Secretary Ron Brown, whose department was deeply involved, tragically died in a plane crash during the proceedings—the scandal was largely overlooked by the media.
GreenTech
McAuliffe—along with business partner Tony Rodham, brother to Hillary Clinton—also was at the center of an Obama-era scam involving electric-car company GreenTech, which faced multiple investigations and allegations that it abused a special visa program to give permanent residency to its Chinese investors.
The Free Beacon reported that the business received special treatment from the Department of Homeland Security due to McAuliffe’s “persistent and obnoxious” lobbying. DHS Deputy Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas wrote that after attempting to deny visas to GreenTech investors he received several voicemails from McAuliffe that were “laced with expletives at a high volume.”
McAuliffe resigned from the company prior to his 2013 gubernatorial run, and GreenTech subsequently declared bankruptcy after coming under fire from Watchdog.org.
‘We have these teams coming in to play in our Sun Bowl this weekend and the hotels are booked…’
After being released from ICE detention centers, illegal immigrants turn to nonprofit shelters for food handouts and other necessities. IMAGE/CBS News via Youtube
(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) For years, the debate between Republicans and Democrats was how best to curb illegal immigration.
Under former President Barack Obama, who refused to enforce existing immigration law and encouraged families to leave their undocumented minors on America’s doorstep, the Left shifted its argument to “What’s the big deal?”
Now, as the scourge of the weakened immigration policies comes home to roost, leaving both law enforcement and humanitarian agencies overwhelmed on both sides of the border, Democrats have again moved the goalpost, asking “How dare you deny their entitlements?”
The shift in trajectory became clear this week as Immigration and Customs Enforcement, overwhelmed by new arrivals of caravan migrants flooding the border who have brought illness and other critical needs with them, released hundreds—possibly thousands—of formerly detained immigrants into the border town of El Paso, Texas.
ICE’s Office of Public Affairs was unavailable to respond to Liberty Headlines’ inquiry into the official count or reasons for the releases due to the government shutdown. However, media outlets on site reported that around 1,600 had already been released as of Friday with more expected next week.
Some linked it with the Flores settlement’s “catch and release” policy, which limits the length of time children—and thus families—can remain in detention, perhaps indicating that the recent influx of caravan migrants had hit this limit.
The deaths of two Guatemalan children recently while in detention also has led to exasperation at the Department of Homeland Security, which is being burdened by medical screenings on top of a more than 86 percent surge in illegal border crossings over last year.
DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen said in a recent statement, “Our system has been pushed to a breaking point by those who seek open borders,” while appealing to politicians and immigrant families alike to stop endangering children’s lives.
Nielsen was expected to travel to El Paso on Friday to inspect the situation firsthand.
Vox, a frequent mouthpiece of the extreme and irrational Left, articulated the angst that liberals now felt over the Trump administration giving them exactly what they had wished for by releasing the detainees:
“Amid growing scrutiny of Border Patrol detention conditions, the new release plan may seem welcome to Trump critics,” it wrote. “But that raises the question of where all those newly released families will go; who will help them adjust to life in the United States; and how they will get to where they need to go while awaiting their immigration court hearings.”
In El Paso, the nonprofit shelters forced to accommodate the influx complained about having the rug yanked from underneath them by the federal government.
Some, after being stretched to capacity were forced to turn away those seeking asylum from the winter cold under their roofs.
Rep. Beto O’Rourke, fresh off one of the most expensive Senate races in history, called on donors to assist while pointing the finger at ICE for creating the crisis.
“ICE made a mistake yesterday,” O’Rourke said Monday, according to the El Paso Times. “I don’t think it was intentional. I think they made a mistake in not alerting the community.”
But some elected officials’ spirit of forgiveness quickly gave way to angry demands that the federal agencies do something to take the problem off their hands.
Veronica Escobar/IMAGE: EPCC TV via Youtube
“This really is a federal obligation, and the federal government needs to step in and build some temporary housing facilities,” said Democrat Rep.-elect Veronica Escobar.
Escobar, who will take over the congressional seat being vacated by O’Rourke next week, said the immigration scourge could potentially wreak havoc on El Paso’s weekend tourism.
“We have these teams coming in to play in our Sun Bowl this weekend and the hotels are booked,” Escobar said, according to CBS News. “We’re facing a real crisis coming up … to find places for all of these [migrant] families.”
But despite the streak of NIMBYism, Escobar, touted as one of the first Latinas to represent Texas in Congress, maintained that her district will continue to welcome the immigrants and provide for them.
“As a community, we are going to do whatever we need to do to take care of these people,” she said. “They are vulnerable. They deserve compassion. And help. And support. And El Pasoans always rise to that occasion.”
With the announcement of another caravan planned for Jan. 15 to transport 15,000 migrants from Honduras to the U.S. border, Escobar will almost certainly be given the opportunity to have that resolve tested soon.
‘The president’s visit made fools of these critics…’
President Donald Trump visits troops in Iraq over Christmas./IMAGE: @realdonaldtrump screenshot via Twitter
(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) With Wall Street, Capitol Hill and everywhere in between closed for the Christmas holiday, the non-stop flow of the news stream slowed to a drip this week.
Some newsrooms fell back on their “evergreens”—feel-good puff pieces, pre-planned and canned for use anytime.
Not so for the trolls at certain left-wing outlets, where the reflexive instinct to any story is to seek the Trump-bashing angle. Feasting on a string of negative headlines, they attempted to paint it as the president’s worst week ever.
But those expecting Trump to let down his guard for the holidays did so at their own peril as he once again reversed courses and left many with eggnog on their face following a surprise troop visit in Iraq.
Clinging to the familiar narratives, biased liberal outlets that were poised to savage Trump for taking a break during the government shutdown dispatched their crews to his Florida retreat, Mar-a-lago, only to find he wasn’t there.
The despondent journalists found themselves forced instead to torch Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump, relying on a handful of random social media posts and paparazzi photos to justify the coverage.
Meanwhile, as the president canceled his plans—presumably so he could suffer the shutdown alone at the White House—the remaining “journalists” dug into the archives to try to ascertain what Trump wasn’t doing that he ought to be.
The Media Research Center reported that the echo chamber soon found its scoop. Starting with NBC, several outlets chimed in by criticizing him for being the first president since 2002 not to visit troops over Christmastime.
That alone may have seemed a bit ironic given Trump’s recent announcement that he was planning to withdraw troops from Syria and substantially reduce the forces in Afghanistan—moves which the typically anti-military media suddenly found itself indignant over.
But it became especially awkward when the news broke that Donald and Melania Trump had, in fact, made a surprise visit to Iraq, followed shortly thereafter by a visit to troops in Germany.
This left desperate media hacks scrambling for any other angle they could find to criticize Trump for doing exactly what they had criticized him for not doing (and fawned over his predecessor for doing).
Some even had the audacity to attack the troops who enthusiastically received the president.
CNN will attack anyone who supports President Trump, including the brave men and women of our military who fight everyday to protect our freedom https://t.co/x6VjuUJFdF
After noticing the double-standard in place between the Obama and Trump visits, The Washington Post obligingly ran a story to point out the contrasts, if only to go out of its way to try to pin each and every hypocritical media narrative onto Trump himself.
“The contrast between the two trips is sometimes stark—not just because of the timing, but also because of the very different tone they put on display,” The Post reached. “This itself is a reflection of the different personalities of the two men as commanders in chief, as well as the dramatic changes that have taken place in the Middle East in the past nine years.”
Much to its credit, despite its newsroom joining in the ballyhooing of the Iraq visit, USA Today ran an opinion piece by Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer of the London Center for Policy Research pointing out the overwhelming duplicity of the press coverage.
“The visit counters the false narrative that the liberal media and anti-Trump politicians have been working to construct about our commander in chief,” Shaffer said. “Instead of admitting to their error, they attack him for the visit.”
But, as is often the case when the media attempts to construct a narrative, Trump got the last laugh, said Shaffer.
“The president’s visit made fools of these critics. The troops’ enthusiastic welcome of their commander in chief and the Trumps’ Christmastime visit shows that the president cares first and foremost for the safety and well-being of the young Americans we rely on to protect us,” he said. “And the president’s foreign policy decisions show he is far more concerned about the price of war—and of individual sacrifice—than his recent predecessors.”
But after a controversial decree banning bump stocks that gun advocates said violated both the Constitution and all legal precedent, the Trump administration now faces friendly fire from conservatives seeking injunctive relief.
“[I]f anyone thought the election of Donald Trump would put the Second Amendment community on ‘Easy Street,’ this apparently will not be the case,” said Erich Pratt, executive director for Gun Owners of America, in an e-mail to supporters. “But we have fought gun-grabbers in dire circumstances before.”
GOA and several other pro-firearm stakeholders filed suit Wednesday in the Western Michigan District court challenging the recent policy change in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives that would reclassify bump stocks as fully-automatic weaponry.
“ATF’s re-classification of bump stocks as machineguns is a political decision designed to circumvent the legislative process, not a legal one based on any technical evaluation,” said the complaint. “It ignores the plain text of the statute, and all prior ATF determinations and opinions.”
The plaintiffs contended that Trump’s decision was based solely on political pressure following incidents such as last year’s Las Vegas shooting at the Mandalay Bay hotel, where murderer Stephen Paddock was believed to have used guns that included bump-stock attachments to massacre 58 concert-goers in a barrage of rapid fire.
However, the plaintiffs said, “The classification of bump stocks as machine guns is arbitrary and capricious, contrary to law, obfuscates the way bump stocks operate, and reaches an irrational decision, unsupportable in either law or fact.”
While bump-stocks do, in the hands of trained users, permit a quicker firing technique, they do not change the guns mechanically into fully automatic weapons since the trigger mechanism still functions the same, requiring a separate push for each shot.
“Bump stocks are nothing more than a type of firearm stock (usually plastic) that fits loosely over the firearm, allowing the firearm to reciprocate back-and-forth freely,” said the suit.
Pratt warned in his email that the ATF ban, if it were allowed to take effect, would set in motion what might be an alarming precedent.
“If the bump stock converts an AR-15 into a machine gun, then AR-15s could be next on the chopping block,” he said. “After all, there are other items which can help bump fire an AR-15: rubber bands, belt loops, etc.”
The suit seeking the injunction was filed the same day as the new policy was published in the Federal Registry, giving bump-stock owners until March 26—without further court intervention—to destroy their devices or turn them in to a local ATF bureau.
“Unless you destroy or surrender your bump stock within 90 days (with no compensation whatsoever) and sign a form saying you waive all your constitutional rights, the ATF is claiming that you are a felon—subject to 10 years in prison,” Pratt said.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., responded to the initial policy change and GOA lawsuit by saying in a Washington Post opinion piece that legislation was also needed to reinforce the executive order.
“[L]et’s not celebrate too quickly,” wrote Feinstein. “Presidents can rescind regulations just as easily as they create them, and in this case, the bump stock ban will likely be tied up in court for years.”
Pratt said filing the suit in Michigan ensured that it could move through the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, which has proven itself to be supportive of gun rights, perhaps en route to a Supreme Court challenge.
In the meantime, plaintiffs hoped the injunction would be enough to block gun-confiscation efforts and allow due process to take its course.
“You may or may not own a bump stock,” said Pratt. “You may or may not like bump stocks. But you can bet that the goal of gun grabbers is, ultimately, not just banning bump stocks, but, rather, putting ‘points on the board’ toward its goal of banning civilian ownership of all firearms.”
‘Our system has been pushed to a breaking point by those who seek open borders…’
Kirstjen Nielsen/PHOTO: World Economic Forum via Creative Commons
(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) Following the second illness-related death recently of a Guatemalan immigrant child in Border Patrol custody Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen M. Nielsen condemned activist judges and other illegal immigration advocates for incentivizing the dangerous journey.
“Our system has been pushed to a breaking point by those who seek open borders,” Nielsen said in a statement.
Although only one in 10 asylum-seekers is granted it, Nielsen said there had been an 86 percent surge in illegal border crossings compared with last year due to “a system that encourages bad actors to coach aliens into making frivolous claims.”
The uptick in unaccompanied minors and families is the result of former President Barack Obama’s decision not to enforce deportation through his Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals policy.
Despite President Donald Trump’s efforts to end the program, liberal judges in the 9th District court, notorious for issuing injunctions against him, have refused to allow him to undo his predecessor’s executive fiat.
In addition, the courts helped to block Trump’s child-separation policy for families arriving at the border.
Since the children can only be detained for a period of around three weeks when there is a guardian to release them to, this means the entire family is released into the U.S.
“To those in Congress who continue to refuse to take action to address the loopholes that cause a flood of humanity to travel north and place children at risk, I once again call on you to do your job,” said Nielsen.
Although she was highly critical of the politics behind it, Nielsen said DHS will continue to do everything within its means to ensure the well-being of the children taken into custody, including an in-depth look at the medical screenings process with help from the Centers for Disease Control, Coast Guard and Department of Defense to provide additional expertise and manpower to the Border Patrol.
Due to the increased numbers of children suffering respiratory illnesses, dehydration and other conditions that may be exacerbated by the journey, Nielsen said all children apprehended now will receive a thorough medical assessment, even if the accompanying adult does not ask for one.
However, she warned that there would continue to be limit on Border Patrol’s ability to provide medical services.
“Given the remote locations of their illegal crossing and the lack of resources, it is even more difficult for our personnel to be first responders.”
‘I think the nation’s fourth graders know this is no way to run a lemonade stand…’
Donald Trump/photo by Gage Skidmore (CC)
(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) As the 2018 legislative term careens to a halt, President Donald Trump has customarily dominated the news cycle this week with blockbuster policy moves that have felt sometimes off-the-cuff.
He’s laid the groundwork for some potential legacy items, with a successful district court challenge to the constitutionality of Obamacare, and successful passage of a House bill funding his border wall. Moreover, the successful passage of a major farm bill package and criminal justice reform have given Congress something to crow about as they return to their districts for the holidays.
A less robust economy, courtesy of Federal Reserve interest hikes, might also weaken his hand as he approaches the new challenges of an actively hostile chamber of Congress and countless other partisan forces aligned against him.
The chaos surrounding these events has left some Trump allies—and NeverTrumpers alike—clamoring for method in the madness.
On Thursday, RealClearPolitics columnist A.B. Stoddard gave voice to the tensions in a discussion with Fox News anchor Bret Baier.
“I think the nation’s fourth graders know this is no way to run a lemonade stand,” fretted Stoddard, referencing Thursday’s passage of a House funding bill driven by the pro-Trump Freedom Caucus that faces grim prospects in the narrowly-split Senate.
“This is completely irresponsible,” she said. “The markets are rattling on the prospect of a shutdown that’s turning on Ann Coulter’s tweets.”
A.B. Stoddard/IMAGE: Fox News via Mediaite
Stoddard took particular issue with the perceived unpredictability of the process, as Friday marked the final deadline for the current legislative body to approve funding for several crucial areas of the federal bureaucracy.
“The president time and again is contemptuous of process and of compromise,” said Stoddard. “… It requires presidential leadership—he refuses to do the hard work.”
Although Congress had earlier passed a stop-gap funding measure to push the appropriations debate into January, Trump threatened to veto it and has continued to insist on a full $5 billion to fund the U.S.–Mexico border wall as part of its Homeland Security spending, or else force a shut down to parts of the government over the Christmas holiday.
The shutdown mainly would affect nonessential services, such as national parks and monuments, certain State Department functions and the furloughs at the IRS (since tax season has not yet begun).
Minority Leader Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., has given no indication that he will flinch on the wall funding.
Stoddard did not limit her rebuke to the Oval Office, calling to task the Freedom Caucus members of the House of Representatives—including Reps. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and Mark Meadows, R-N.C.—who were pushing for the political showdown in Congress.
“They don’t know what they’re talking about,” Stoddard said. “This is political malpractice. They’re wrong.”
Other frequent Trump allies also broke ranks on some of the president’s recent policy moves, notably Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who condemned the surprise decision to withdraw troops from Syria and Afghanistan. Although Trump has touted the eradication of ISIS, Graham warned that the lack of a U.S. presence there will lead to a resurgence of terrorist activity.
Meanwhile, a gaggle of NeverTrumpers—among them Sen. Marco Rubio, R.-Fla.; Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb.; and Bill Kristol, co-founder of the erstwhile Weekly Standard—all weighed in on the departure announcement of Defense Secretary James “Mad Dog” Mattis.
Just read Gen. Mattis resignation letter. It makes it abundantly clear that we are headed towards a series of grave policy errors which will endanger our nation,damage our alliances & empower our adversaries. 1/2 pic.twitter.com/ztc0Yihccn
Although the liberal Huffington Post gleefully painted it as a panic among conservatives, the alarmism did not mark a major departure from past anti-Trump commentary. Kristol has even floated the possibility of a Trump primary challenge that would include Mattis on the ticket.
But despite the perceptions of dire doom and gloom, Trump has often proved his pragmatic leadership style thrives under such conditions and that he is at his best when being underestimated.
One thing Americans can count on is that there will be plenty of surprises yet to come this holiday season—and not just under the Christmas tree.
‘People are hoping for someone, be it Schiff or Robert Mueller, to just deus ex machina Trump away…’
(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) One of President Donald Trump’s most bombastic critics, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., used an appearance on Stephen Colbert’s late-night talk show to spread innuendo, without evidence, about Trump’s business dealings.
The liberal love-fest with partisan hack Colbert also offered a tease of the mudslinging to come when Schiff—a candidate heavily invested in by far-left operatives like the Soros family—replaces Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., as chair of the House Intelligence Committee in January.
Although Schiff offered little in the way of facts, he used the opportunity, framed by Colbert’s asking what he most hoped to investigate, to implicate Trump in a money-laundering scheme by claiming a tenuous connection through the world’s 15th largest bank, Germany’s Deutsche Bank.
Kooky conspiracy theorist Schiff said both Trump’s and Russia’s status as clients of the international lender was evidence enough to merit a taxpayer-funded inquiry by the U.S. legislature into whether there was a secret link.
“For many years, legitimate U.S. banks wouldn’t do business with Trump Organization. The only bank that would was Deutsche Bank,” Schiff told Colbert.
“Now, Deutsche Bank was fined hundreds of millions of dollars by the state of New York for laundering Russian money. Real estate is an attractive venue to launder money. If the Russians were—and we don’t know that they were—but if they were, it would be very powerful leverage…. that might explain his often otherwise inexplicable fondness for Putin and Russia.”
A review by Deutsche Bank offered no evidence of a link between the Trump family’s business dealings and the bank’s Moscow clients.
Schiff also directed his attack at questions of whether Trump continued to work with Russians on a business deal to build a sky-rise building—similar to New York City’s Trump Tower—while he was in the process of campaigning for the presidency.
The project ultimately was scrapped, and no link to Trump’s campaign nor evidence of wrongdoing has been presented publicly. Nonetheless, Schiff used it in his effort to cudgel the president by insinuating that he lied to the public about his “malfeasance.”
“We expect the Russians to lie. We expect a president of the United States to be telling the truth—and therein lies the problem,” Schiff said. “For two years we’ve had this deeply unethical man running the country, and for two years the Republican Congress has done nothing to oversee any of the allegations of malfeasance—and that stops now.”
Ironically, Schiff has been a leading voice in calling for the suppression of confidential materials, such as the FBI’s warrant applications to the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance (FISA) court, that would potentially have exposed the dishonesty and corruption in the Hillary Clinton campaign.
In February, Trump issued one of several tweets blasting Schiff, calling him one of the “biggest liars and leakers in Washington” for undermining the committee’s closed-door hearings into the FBI’s FISA abuse, which included basing their surveillance warrants against the Trump campaign on now-debunked rumors presented in the Clinton/DNC-funded “Steele Dossier.”
Little Adam Schiff, who is desperate to run for higher office, is one of the biggest liars and leakers in Washington, right up there with Comey, Warner, Brennan and Clapper! Adam leaves closed committee hearings to illegally leak confidential information. Must be stopped!
Schiff recently made headlines for claiming Trump could face jail time over hush-money payments he allegedly directed his disgraced former lawyer to make in an extortion scheme by Playboy bunny Karen McDougal and porn star Stormy Daniels. However, those allegations, too, prove troublesome when stacked against similar investigations of prominent Democrats.
Notably, during the Colbert visit, Schiff made no mention of the “hush-money” scandal, nor of any direct evidence of Russian collusion—the two areas where Democrats have most sought an avenue to pursue impeachment of Trump.
Instead, Schiff continued to suggest that Trump’s financial dealings were a crucial focus, adding Saudi Arabia into the mix as well.
“You have the president of the United States rejecting the conclusions of our intelligence agencies about the murder of Khashoggi, and naturally we ask the question why. Is foreign funding influencing U.S. policy in a way that is not in our national interest?”
A recent hearing by the House Oversight committee asked the same of Hillary Clinton and whether she may have used her supposedly nonprofit Clinton Foundation as a pay-to-play operation allowing foreign dignitaries like the Saudi crown prince to gain access to the State Department. The Oversight hearing also explored Clinton’s dealings with Russia through a Canadian intermediary, Uranium One.
No such direct allegations of abuse of office have been levied against Trump, despite Schiff’s calls for scrutiny of his finances while a private citizen.
Schiff said that Nunes had previously blocked Democratic efforts for a partisan fishing expedition into Trump’s businesses.
“One of the most basic rules of doing an investigation is you follow the money,” he said. “We were not allowed to follow the money.”
And Schiff menacingly rejected the notion, raised by Colbert, that Trump considered his personal finances a “red line” in what he would cooperate with Congressional probes on.
“He is not in a position to draw red lines—that’s not his job,” Schiff said. ” … He can give pardons, but even the pardon power is not absolute. You cannot use the pardon power if your intention is to obstruct justice.”
Thus far, despite calling investigations into his campaign a “witch hunt” Trump has issued no pardons to those associated with his campaign who have been indicted by Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s office on largely unrelated charges.
Schiff said he hopes to press Congress to “pass a bill that says if you pardon anyone during an investigation in which you or your family is a subject, witness or target, the entire investigative files will be provided to Congress.”
But even the liberal media seemed to agree that Schiff’s tough talk on the Colbert show amounted to little more than “feel-good theater.”
GQ magazine said of the appearance that Schiff’s “remarkable popularity” (presumably based on leftist media attention) showed just how desperately liberals wish to find dirt on Trump.
“People are hoping for someone, be it Schiff or Robert Mueller, to just deus ex machina Trump away. They’re hoping for a huge plot twist that will send Trump to jail, or at least out of the White House, and bring back some feeling of normalcy,” GQ said.
Owners will have 90 days after rule takes effect to ‘divest themselves of the devices’…
Bump stock/IMAGE: JerryRigEverything via Youtube
(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) With Democrats already challenging his legitimacy in courtroom battles, acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker may soon face challenges from gun enthusiasts on the Right over a controversial policy change banning “bump stock” enhancements on semiautomatic rifles.
The Justice Department announced today that it would now classify bump stocks as fully automatic “machine guns” due to the rapid-fire ability that they permit with a single squeeze of the trigger.
The new amendment stipulates that bump-stock owners will have 90 days after the rule’s publication in the Federal Register to “divest themselves of the devices,” either by destroying them or turning them in to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. The ATF recommended making an appointment first.
Additional information is available on the ATF website. It is unclear for now what future challenges, if any, the rule may face before being implemented as official policy or when the final implementation would take effect.
Some court rulings in the past have blocked legislative attempts to ban bump-stocks.
Whitaker said the move came at the direction of President Donald Trump, emphasizing the president’s support for “law and order” and school safety as the primary considerations.
“We are faithfully following President Trump’s leadership by making clear that bump stocks, which turn semiautomatics into machine guns, are illegal, and we will continue to take illegal guns off of our streets,” Whitaker said.
In previous statements, the National Rifle Association also has expressed support for tighter restrictions on bump stocks.
However, some may worry about the precedent it sets, which could pave the way for other efforts to erode Second Amendment protections by executive fiat or otherwise unconstitutional policy changes.
Democrats—some of whom made bump-stock bans a central part of their platform—have promised additional efforts to restrict gun rights, including universal background checks, when they take control of the House majority in January.
Georgia state Sen. Michael Williams, who last year held a bump-stock raffle in defiance of “Hollywood elites” as part of a primary bid to win the gubernatorial nomination, said that even though mass shooter Stephen Paddock used them in committing a massacre of 58 concert-goers in Las Vegas, the bump stock addition did little to help.
Ultimately, Williams said, proposals to ban them were a canard that ran the risk of luring people into a false sense of complacency.
“In reality, the bump stock is the new, shiny object politicians are using to deceive voters into believing they are taking action against gun violence,” Williams said. “Many firearms experts determined the Las Vegas shooter’s use of a bump stock actually prevented more casualties and injuries due to its inconsistency, inaccuracy, and lack of control. There is zero evidence that banning bump stocks would prevent any gun violence deaths.”
