Friday, June 5, 2026

Schumer Told Aspiring Senate Candidate to Just Raise Money in a ‘Basement’

0

‘Then we’re going to spend 80 percent of it on negative ads about Tillis…’

Newspapers Against O-Care Reform Cited by Dems Mostly Endorsed Clinton
Charles Schumer/Photo by mdfriendofhillary (CC)

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headline) A would-be Democratic challenger to Sen. Thom Tillis, R-NC, recently revealed that a top congressional leader’s plan for regaining the Senate was to spurn grassroots campaigning in favor of heavy investment in negative ads.

North Carolina state Sen. Jeff Jackson said he met with Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer, D-NY, while seeking support for his run, the National Review reported.

He outlined his plan to do “100 town halls in 100 days” and line up a groundswell of support in the historically red state that Democrats see as increasingly vulnerable.

However, Schumer told Jackson that his plan was the “wrong answer” for how to win the support—and crucial funding—from the national party leaders.

“We want you to spend the next 16 months in a windowless basement raising money,” Schumer said, “and then we’re going to spend 80 percent of it on negative ads about Tillis.”

Jackson made the revelation during a talk at the University of North Carolina in Charlotte, where he acknowledged that the “artistic differences” had led the Democrats’ top brass to throw their weight behind former legislator Cal Cunningham instead.

The National Review noted that Cunningham had given only three interviews in the four months since announcing his candidacy. He made 18 appearances at largely social functions from Aug. 10 to Sept. 29, many of which may have doubled as fundraisers.

Jackson said in contrast to these “smile-and-shake” events, he had envisioned a campaign that delved into the important issues constituents were facing.

However, “realizing that I probably wasn’t going to have the support of this group, which is important financially because I ain’t rich . . . I mean, they kind of tipped the scales in favor of not running,” Jackson said at the UNC-Charlotte talk.

After the National Review obtained the audio of the event, they sought comment from Jackson, who did not respond but announced his endorsement of Cunningham within hours of being contacted.

State Sen. Erica Smith, who plans to contest Cunningham in the Democratic primary, was happy to level her criticism both at Cunningham’s tepid campaigning and the involvement of the national party in trying to influence the primary race.

“The special interest groups and big, wealthy donors out of New York are trying to buy this Senate seat, and it’s just shameful and it is embarrassing,” she told RealClear Politics.

“I just worry about the people I serve in North Carolina,” Smith continued. “We don’t have the same demographics as New York, and this Senate seat is not for sale.”

The same strategy being deployed against Tillis appears to be in effect also for the races against Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa.

In both cases, Democrats have rushed to challenge the incumbent Republicans facing very different controversies.

Collins, a centrist, is under attack from the Left over her vote to confirm Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

King has lost the support of moderates on the Right over comments that many considered racially insensitive and questionable in their judgment.

Regardless of the varying circumstances, a well-financed barrage of negative attacks seems to be the solution. And the party’s campaign arm seems to have little room for humoring candidates who may have ideas of their own.

After throwing its weight behind a first-time candidate to challenge King in Iowa, Schumer reportedly told another challenger, “We don’t need a primary.”

Claim That Hillary’s Uranium One Scandal is Just a ‘Conspiracy’ is FAKE NEWS

0

‘I repeat: those issues have nothing at all to do with this case…’

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) Justice Department prosecutors in a Maryland bribery trial labelled Hillary Clinton‘s Uranium One scandal a “conspiracy theory” while trying to distinguish it from their own case, much to the delight of partisan naysayers in the press.

In April 2015, the New York Times first reported on the shocking pay-to-play setup involving the Russian government, a Canadian uranium-mining firm, the Clinton Foundation and the State Department.

Shortly thereafter, more details on the Uranium One scandal emerged in conservative investigative journalist Peter Schweizer‘s exposé Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich.

Liberal media sources like McClatchy News Service have since chafed under the allegations that Clinton, during her tenure as secretary of State, colluded with the Russians in a 2010 deal that gave them controlling stake in several U.S. and Canadian uranium mines while the Clinton Foundation simultaneously received a kickback.

During the 2016 election and afterward, the story proved an inconvenient counterpoint to Democrats’ unfounded claims that President Donald Trump was a puppet of the Russians.

Trump, himself, observed that the real evidence of Russian collusion lay with his Democrat opponent and accused Clinton of having given away 20 percent of U.S. uranium.

But investigative efforts stalled in Congress after Democrats regained control of the House of Representatives last year.

In typical form, left-wing fact-checkers have nit-picked at minutiae surrounding the complicated series of exchanges in order to qualify, downplay and dismiss Republicans’ assertions.

Bill and Hillary Clinton / IMAGE: CNN via Youtube

These deflections, of course, gloss over the fundamental ethical concerns and national security implications regarding Clinton’s corrupt track record of quid-pro-quo bargains for her own political benefit.

Some sought to use the recent legal filing in Maryland as a justification to dispel the entire Uranium One story as a conservative fiction. However, the DOJ prosecutors seem only to have been denying one crucial aspect of it.

Maryland U.S. Attorney Robert K. Hur is leading the upcoming case against Mark Lambert, the former president of a company that transported nuclear material. Lambert is accused of bribing Russian officials to win their business.

Websites and social media posts have reportedly sought to establish a connection between Lambert’s indictment and questions as to whether the Justice Department is actively investigating the Uranium One scandal.

Hur, who worked in the office of former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein while he was overseeing the Mueller investigation into debunked claims of Russian collusion with the Trump campaign, emphatically denied that the cases were linked.

In court documents released Monday that outlined jury selection for the November trial, prosecutors proposed two subsections titled “Unrelated Conspiracy Theories,” reported McClatchy.

“Although this is a case involving an alleged criminal conspiracy with a Russian official, this case has nothing at all to do with the investigation by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, or alleged collusion between the Donald Trump Presidential Campaign and Russia, or alleged Russian interference in U.S. elections,” wrote Hur’s legal team. “I repeat: that investigation has nothing at all to do with this case.”

It then issued a similar disclaimer regarding the Uranium One matter.

“This case also has nothing at all to do with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the Clinton Foundation, or the approval by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (or ‘CFIUS’) of the Russian government’s acquisition of a company called Uranium One and certain uranium rights in the United States,” they wrote. “I repeat: those issues have nothing at all to do with this case.”

GOP Sens. Demand Answers on Criminal Probes Against Four Fake Kavanaugh Accusers

‘It is important to protect the constitutional process from being hijacked by bad actors involved in insidious partisan operations…’

Attorney Michael Avenatti Accused of Stiffing Lawyer on $2 Million Debt
Michael Avenatti (screen shot: The View/Youtube)

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) A group of GOP senators wants to know what happened with four supposed “witnesses” against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh who were criminally referred for submitting what were found to be materially false statements to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“While most of those individuals appear to have contacted the Committee in good faith, some did not,” wrote the group of nine Judiciary Republicans in a letter to Attorney General William Barr and FBI Director Christopher Wray.

Led by former Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley, R-Neb., and current Chair Lindsey Graham, R-SC, the group requested an update on the status of the probes, which not only increased the level of rancor during Kavanaugh’s contentious hearings last year, but also consumed precious time and money.

“These criminal referrals were not made lightly,” wrote the senators. “In each of the aforementioned cases, the referred individual(s) made false allegations against then-Judge Kavanaugh. These allegations were taken seriously and carefully investigated by Committee staff, resulting in the diversion of significant resources.”

Although Kavanaugh’s first and primary accuser, California psychology professor Christine Blasey Ford, was not among the names—with her highly watched testimony deemed ‘credible’ by many, despite being uncorroborated—some of the criminal referrals may dredge up memories for those who closely followed the confirmation hearings:

  • One is Julie Swetnick, who came forward with claims that Kavanaugh engaged in drug-fueled gang rapes during his college years.
  • Another is for Swetnick’s attorney, Michael Avenatti—already a familiar name from his time representing Trump accuser Stormy Daniels—who was found to have falsified evidence.
  • A third accuser, Judy Munro–Leighton, claimed authorship of an unsigned letter sent to the office of Sen. Kamala Harris which graphically alleged Kavanaugh and a friend had raped her in the back seat of a car. She later denied having written the letter and admitted she was only seeking attention.
  • The fourth referral—which was actually the first one sent, chronologically, came from a man who claimed to have had direct knowledge that Kavanaugh assaulted a close friend on a boat in the harbor at Newport, Rhode Island in 1985. He later recanted and apologized.

In addition to finding those four had made potentially criminal false statements, the committee—which in total investigated 45 individuals and 25 written statements—-released its 414-page report in November 2018, finding that none of the witnesses offered sufficient evidence to support the allegations against Kavanaugh.

Even so, left-wing operatives have continued their bid to smear Kavanaugh. Last month, the New York Times rolled out supposedly new allegations of a yet-unreported sexual assault involving Kavanaugh during his college years.

The coverage—which was tied to a release of a book written by the purported journalists—threatened to reignite year-old wounds in the bitter partisan rift as Democrats clamored for Kavanaugh to be impeached.

The unverified allegations came from a man with close ties to Democrats including Bill and Hillary Clinton who claimed to have witnessed an assault. But the Times buried in its report the fact that the alleged victim had no memory of it and refused to speak with reporters.

The newspaper was later forced to issue a correction.

The issue was further deflated by the revelation that these allegations already had gone before the Senate Judiciary Committee and the FBI, who did not find any merit in them.

President Donald Trump responded on Twitter by encouraging the embattled justice to start holding accountable those who were attempting to defame him.

Likewise, the Judiciary Senators in their recent letter pointed to high-profile cases involving Martha Stewart, former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich and George W. Bush White House staffer Scooter Libby among those who had done time for lying to congressional investigators.

They said it was a crucial deterrent to prevent others from acting in bad faith.

“It is important to protect the constitutional process from being hijacked by bad actors involved in insidious partisan operations,” wrote the Senators. “The Committee can bring bad actors to the attention of law enforcement and the American people by being as transparent as possible about its investigative findings.”

The group gave the DOJ and FBI until Oct. 21 to respond with an update in the four Kavanaugh referrals.

“The next Supreme Court nominee should not have to defend himself or herself against baseless and fabricated allegations, and Committee staff should not have to spend valuable time investigating them,” wrote the senators.

Pulitzer-Winner Dishes Deep-State Dirt on Strzok and Page, Lynch, Rosenstein

0

‘I know you and Pete are friends, but you have to be more careful. People are talking, and this isn’t good for you…’

James B. Stewart / PHOTO: jamesbstewart.net

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) An explosive new book is taking on the federal bureaucracy with several eye-opening insights about the Swamp’s efforts to resist and undermine President Donald Trump’s administration.

Among the shocking reveals teased in James B. Stewart‘s Deep State: Trump, the FBI and the Rule of Law are that former FBI attorney Lisa Page—a key player in the Steele Dossier conspiracy to promote the hoax that Russia had compromising information on Trump—lied to others at the agency about her relationship with agent Peter Strzok.

The book also uncovers the bias of former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, which led even disgraced FBI Director James Comey to register his concerns, and touches on ex-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein‘s secret attempt to have Trump declared ‘unfit’ for the presidency, according to a preview by The Daily Mail.

In their ever more desperate attempt to discredit damning information about their countless scandals and misconduct from Benghazi to Ukraine, left-wing operatives and media are quick to dismiss one of their favorite boogeymen, the conservative press.

But they will be hard-pressed to punch holes in Stewart’s credentials, given a prestigious background that includes New York Times columnist, Columbia University journalism professor and Pulitzer Prize winner.

On top of his journalism cachet, Stewart brings to his reporting a legal background, and experience covering the White House from his 1996 probe into the Clinton administration, Blood Sport: The President and His Adversaries.

‘Lovebirds’ Lie to the FBI

FBI's Trump Haters Under Probe for Leaks to Media
Peter Strzok & Lisa Page/PHOTOS: Justice Dept. & Ohio State U.

Among the details he reveals about Page and Strzok is the fact that the text-swapping paramours, who both were early members of Robert Mueller‘s investigative team despite their undeniable anti-Trump bias, were slightly ashamed of their workplace romance.

Stewart writes in the newly released book that Page was, in fact, “acutely embarrassed, mortified” to the point that she outright lied to her boss, Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, about the relationship.

Counterintelligence Head Bill Priestap raised the issue with McCabe, who then told Page, “I know you and Pete are friends, but you have to be more careful. People are talking, and this isn’t good for you.”

After denying the affair to McCabe, Page went to Priestap and asked him to restore some duties to Strzok that he had reassigned due to the suspicions of the lovebirds’ romantic entanglement.

Comey Shocked by Lynch’s Partisan Loyalties

Loretta Lynch, Under a Cloud, to be Honored for Public Service
Loretta Lynch/IMAGE: Harvard U. via YouTube

Upon being caught secretly meeting with ex-President Bill Clinton on the tarmac of the Phoenix airport, then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch had no choice but to recuse herself in the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server to send and receive classified materials.

The task of overseeing the probe then fell to James Comey, who raised eyebrows by calling off the investigation in short order, claiming there was no way to prove that Clinton intended to break the law.

But Stewart confirms the suspicions of many in his account, saying Lynch never truly took her thumb off the scales of justice.

Comey was so alarmed by Lynch’s bias that he considered requesting a special counsel to investigate, but Lynch shut him down.

In fact, the FBI head was “nagged” by a report in which then-Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz assured a high-level official in George Soros‘s Open Society Foundations that they could count on Lynch to protect Clinton.

It took the efforts of a low-level but determined agent to uncover additional e-mails on the laptop of disgraced former congressman Anthony Weiner, who was at the time married to Clinton’s personal assistant, Huma Abedin.

Despite active efforts from biased top-brass officials to sit on the reports of the new emails, Comey was then forced to re-open the case.

Rosenstein’s Attempted Coup

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein/IMAGE: Fox 11 Phoenix via Youtube

While he was overseeing the Mueller investigation into claims of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign, Rod Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, was revealed to have discussed with McCabe the possibility of wearing a wire to ensnare Trump.

It was later revealed that he also suggested invoking the 25th amendment to declare Trump “unfit” to be president. Although McCabe previously characterized it as a short-lived and passing discussion during a wide-ranging conversation, it evidently went farther than that.

Stewart reports in his book that two of Trump’s top staffers, who should have been among his closest allies, were ready to betray him. Former Chief of Staff John Kelly and former Attorney General Jeff Sessions both reportedly were behind the idea.

Stewart also said that Rosenstein’s offer—twice—to wear a wire was enough to shock McCabe, who himself was deeply implicated in the conspiracies to investigate and undermine Trump.

When McCabe incredulously delivered the news to his FBI colleagues, one responded, “That’s a bridge too far. We’re not there yet.”

Kasich Lets CNN’s Don Lemon Down w/ Impeachment Skepticism

0

‘Anybody with half a brain who read that transcript knows exactly what the president was saying…’

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) CNN Anchor Don Lemon attacked NeverTrump analyst John Kasich on Monday for failing to fall in line with uncorroborated leftist dogma about a phone call between President Donald Trump and his Ukrainian counterpart.

Lemon took umbrage after Kasich, the former Republican governor from Ohio and Trump’s 2016 presidential primary opponent, said it would be “incumbent on the Democrats to lay out a very strong case” in order to garner GOP support for impeachment, reported Mediaite.

“Maybe it’s incumbent upon the politicians, the people who are actually leaders, to tell the people exactly what’s going on instead of having the president and his apologists shape a message that is not true,” Lemon snipped, “because anybody with half a brain who read that transcript knows exactly what the president was saying.”

Lemon blamed conservative media, without evidence, for spreading a false message that had led many Republican voters to skepticism and disinterest in the Democrats’ latest impeachment attempt.

“It is obvious,” he claimed. “It’s not nebulous. It’s not, ‘Well, maybe he meant that.’ You know exactly what he meant. All you have to do is read it.”

Accounts of the July 26 phone call between Trump and Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskiy provided the basis for a deep-state whistleblower’s claim that Trump was threatening to withhold military support if Ukraine refused to investigate allegations of corruption surrounding former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter.

The whistleblower’s complaint was directed to the attention of House Democratic leaders who—after having faltered in repeated efforts to find dirt on Trump that might aid in his removal from office—used it last month to announce the start of impeachment proceedings.

The House has yet to formally vote on its impeachment probe, which has led to some legal uncertainty as to its actual status. However, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Intelligence Chair Adam Schiff, both California Democrats, have issued a raft of subpoenas to the White House and other executive offices.

Schiff, in one of the opening committee hearings, controversially offered his own interpretive rendition of the transcript, which he later said was a “satire.”

While he and others, immediately following the transcript’s release, asserted that it need not show direct evidence of a “quid pro quo” exchange between the two leaders, Lemon’s spin reflected a change in tactics to insist that such an arrangement is hiding in plain sight.

The rhetoric echoed earlier claims—since debunked—that the Mueller Report contained coded language about Russian collusion and obstruction of justice that would offer House Democrats their long-sought rationale for impeachment.

Kasich countered Lemon’s claims by saying Republicans and other impeachment skeptics may reasonably dispute his interpretation.

“People disagree with the transcript, and they’re honest people,” Kasich said.

But Lemon responded by attacking Kasich for acting like an “apologist” on behalf of the president.

“You’re not helping people understand the problem, then you are part of the problem,” he said.

Trump has criticized Lemon in the past, calling him the “dumbest man on TV” while frequently sparring with CNN during White House briefings and attacking the “fake news” network in his political rallies.

CLAPPER: Obama Directed Intel Agencies to Spread Russia Hoax

0

‘It’s kind of disconcerting now to be investigated for, you know, having done our duty and done what we were told to do by the president…’

Clapper ADMITS Obama Set up Intel that Led to Mueller Probe
James Clapper (screen shot: The View/Youtube)

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) As corrupt members of President Barack Obama‘s spy arm brace for the impact of a forthcoming Justice Department report on the origins of a Russia collusion hoax, one of the ringleaders, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, sought to pin all the blame on Obama himself.

In an appearance on CNN Wednesday morning, Clapper, who now works as a correspondent for the far-left network, seemed tacitly to acknowledge the corruption that transpired during and after the 2016 election by dismissing it as marching orders from the president and claiming he was just doing his job.

President Donald Trump, however, has said the intelligence agencies’ conspiracy to first spy on his campaign and, then, to continue to undermine his administration after the election amounted to a deep-state “coup” attempt.

Defeated Nazis in the wake of World War II notoriously made similar statements to excuse their guilty conduct.

“The message I’m getting from all this is, apparently what we were supposed to have done was to ignore the Russian interference, ignore the Russian meddling and the threat that it poses to us,” Clapper told CNN anchor Jim Sciutto, “and oh, by the way, blown off what the then commander in chief, President Obama, told us to do, which was to assemble all the reporting that we could that we had available to us.”

Clapper neglected to mention that three years of investigating claims of Russian interference by the FBI and special counsel Robert Mueller turned up no evidence to support the allegations.

Despite the lack of corroborating evidence, Obama’s intelligence agencies used dubiously sourced information commissioned by the Hillary Clinton campaign in order to claim the Russians had compromising information on Trump.

Clapper, himself, is alleged to have leaked the salacious and now-debunked Steele Dossier to CNN, only to formally denounce and deny it in public less than a week later.

“It’s kind of disconcerting now to be investigated for, you know, having done our duty and done what we were told to do by the president,” Clapper whined, in reference to the instructions he claimed Obama had given him.

On his show Monday, conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh called attention to Clapper’s gutless deflection at seeing the investigative tables turned.

“This is a big deal,” Limbaugh said. “This is James Clapper admitting that what all happened during the Trump–Russia collusion thing was ordered by Barack Obama.”

A comprehensive investigation from special prosecutor John Durham is expected to conclude soon, with much speculation that the flimsy impeachment attempt currently underway by Congressional Democrats is something of a pre-emptive offensive strike to discredit the likely findings.

Already, several investigative reports from the DOJ inspector general have found instances of illegal and unethical conduct at the top levels of the FBI during the previous administration, including former FBI Director James Comey and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.

Thus far—even though the IG report did, in some cases, recommend filing prosecutorial charges against the guilty parties—the DOJ has declined to pursue the cases in court, owing likely to the politicized nature of the investigation.

POLL: Majority of Democrats Willfully Ignorant of Bidens’ Ukraine Scandal

0

‘My Republican colleagues’ silence seems unsustainable and inexcusable, given the threat to our national security as well as the integrity of our democratic institutions…’

 1
Joe Biden and Donald Trump / IMAGES via Youtube

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) As facts continued to derail the narrative on House Democrats’ efforts to impeach President Donald Trump, left-wingers tenaciously denied their own guilt while pointing fingers at the president—largely due to willful ignorance and brazen deceptions.

A poll on Saturday revealed that a sizable portion of Democrats was shrugging off the revelations about former Vice President Joe Biden‘s coercion of corrupt Ukrainian officials to fire their top prosecutor.

According to Morning Consult, 55 percent of party loyalists said the scandal would have no impact on their vote.

Biden publicly confessed at least once—during a January 2018 panel with the Council on Foreign Relations—that he had threatened to withhold a billion-dollar loan guarantee if prosecutor-general Victor Shokin wasn’t fired amid an investigation into the Burisma energy company, which had Biden’s son Hunter on its board.

Circling the Wagons

Bursima hired Hunter Biden as he was facing a dishonorable U.S. Navy discharge for failing a drug test. He later acknowledged his longtime struggles with drug abuse, during which he admitted he had been held at gunpoint while buying crack off a homeless man.

The younger Biden son was busted by police for cocaine possession at least once—although no charges were filed. He also allegedly solicited prostitutes before divorcing his wife to marry his brother’s widow and is accused of having sired a child with a third woman.

Despite his having no experience in Ukrainian politics or energy policy, Burisma reportedly paid Hunter a pittance of $50,000 a month to be on its board.

While 15 percent of Democrats said the ethically compromising family situation would make them less likely to support Joe Biden’s candidacy, another 13 percent, bizarrely, said the former Democratic front-runner being implicated in a Ukrainian pay-to-play scandal made them more likely to vote for him.

The limited availability of factual reporting within the liberal media is one primary culprit.

Ukraine Prosecutor Reviewing Cases on Gas Firm That Hired Hunter Biden
Hunter Biden/IMAGE: CNN via YouTube

“In the latest survey, roughly a quarter of voters said they’d heard ‘a lot’ about Biden’s son working with the Ukranian company and the former vice president’s push for Ukraine to fire the prosecutor,” Morning Consult said, noting that Republicans were 8 to 10 points ahead of Democrats in reporting an awareness about the scandal.

Many left-wing dispatches misleadingly cite disputed claims and biased ‘fact-checks’ to assert that “no evidence” exists implicating the Bidens in misconduct while brushing off the details as mere allegations from Trump and his allies.

“Our reporting and the public record of these events confirm that the Ukrainian company was not being investigated by the general prosecutor during the relevant time period,” John Daniszewski, the standards editor for the Associated Press, told Liberty Headlines in an email.

“President Trump’s oft-repeated charge is that the elder Biden must have acted corruptly in seeking to oust Shokin in order to aid his son’s company,” Daniszewski asserted. “But neither he nor his supporters have shown any substantiation for that accusation.”

However, considerable documented evidence reveals the scope of Burisma’s efforts to lobby for influence with the Obama administration—including through its carefully curated board of left-wing influence-peddlers—while also debunking Biden’s claims that he and his son never talked shop.

Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy?

Liberal Media Losing the Effort to Dupe Public on Ukraine 2
Adam Schiff, Nancy Pelosi, Jerry Nadler and Elijah Cummings / IMAGE: ABC News via Youtube

Meanwhile, even with little evidence having been presented publicly to support impeachment claims against President Donald Trump, the left-wing media continues to harangue Republicans to explain their hesitancy to denounce him.

“Across the country, most GOP lawmakers have responded to questions about Trump’s conduct with varying degrees of silence, shrugged shoulders or pained defenses,” claimed far-left MSN. “For now, their collective strategy is simply to survive and not make any sudden moves.”

In most circumstances, reserving judgment until evidence has been presented would be the norm, but following the same plan of attack deployed in their failed attempt to smear Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the Left has again given short-shrift to notions of due process.

A majority of House Democrats already have come out in favor of filing impeachment charges against Trump, even lacking the evidence of a crime, and without ever having voted to initiate an investigation.

“My Republican colleagues’ silence seems unsustainable and inexcusable, given the threat to our national security as well as the integrity of our democratic institutions,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., who had long pressed, with little success, for his own investigations and lawsuits into Trump’s finances that he hoped would yield dirt on the president.

Ironically, the anonymous whistle-blower allegations—that Trump threatened to withhold U.S. financial support from Ukraine if its prosecutors failed to support his administration’s investigative priorities—closely paralleled those against Biden.

But while Biden is on tape acknowledging and boasting about the pressure he exerted on a prior Ukrainian administration, a top U.S. envoy to the eastern European country denied in a closed-door congressional hearing last week that it sought any campaign dirt on Biden.

Former special envoy Kurt Volker also disputed the claims that Trump’s withholding military aid to Ukraine was linked with its pressure to investigate concerns over Biden or other Ukrainian attempts to collude with Democrats in the 2016 election.

Volker’s testimony last week—along with testimony from Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson—came under tight security, a level ordinarily reserved for discussing highly classified information.

Nonetheless, House Intelligence Chair Adam Schiff, D-Calif., selectively leaked snippets of Volker’s text message transcripts to misleadingly suggest that Ukrainian diplomatic officials had questioned Trump’s judgment.

It was one of several recent efforts by Schiff—who is leading the impeachment investigation—to distort the record. On Friday, he received four “Pinocchios” from The Washington Post for having lied about his advance knowledge of the whistleblower complaint against Trump.

MSN spun it thusly while framing the issue as one of many pressures being faced by Republican leaders in forming their response to the impeachment claims: “The president’s allies on talk radio, Fox News Channel and elsewhere in conservative media have been abuzz with conspiratorial talk of a ‘deep state’ coup attempt and accusations that [Schiff] and House Democrats are corrupting the impeachment process.”

Schiff Gets Shredded over Lies about Orchestrating Whistleblower Complaint

0

‘If you’re gonna do it, at least don’t screw it up, Adam!’

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) After Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., sought last week to make a mockery of impeachment hearings with a “satirical” interpretation of a transcript released by President Donald Trump, Schiff became the subject of ridicule over the weekend.

The House Intelligence chairman received four “Pinocchios” from The Washington Post on Friday for falsely claiming he had no advance knowledge of a whistleblower whose complaint was used to initiate Congressional Democrats’ latest impeachment probe.

The New York Times later revealed that Schiff had received an early account from the whistleblower, while others have speculated that he likely helped the anonymous CIA agent file his complaint with the inspector general of the intelligence community.

Trump posted a video on Twitter that equated Schiff with the Italian folk-tale protagonist and Disney icon whose nose grows when he lies.

Even after being called out for the untruthful statements, Schiff continued to spin his web of deceit, claiming that he was not sure it was the same whistleblower and also that he misinterpreted the questions, according to the Independent Journal Review.

Former Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-SC, a longtime Schiff nemesis during investigations into Democrat scandals like Benghazi and the Steele Dossier hoax, piled a savage attack on the notoriously dishonest congressman.

On Fox News, Gowdy observed that Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler, who often favors and sympathizes with the Left in his analyses, had nonetheless given Schiff the maximum number of Pinocchios.

Kamala Harris Awarded 'Four Pinocchios' For Dishonest Claim About Trump's Tax Cut“I think he got four only because you can’t get five,” Gowdy said. “ … And don’t you know how hard that was for The Washington Post to give Adam Schiff four Pinocchios?”

On a more serious note, Gowdy, a former federal prosecutor, said Schiff’s bias and direct involvement in the whistleblower scheme could do major damage to the House efforts.

“Right now he’s made himself a fact witness,” Gowdy told Fox News host Martha MacCallum. “He is in the evidentiary chain for what happened with this whistleblower, and I hope the Republicans make him testify.”

Gowdy continued to goad House Democrats on their botched pursuits while pointing to another Schiff lie, his claim that he had firsthand knowledge of impeachable evidence in the Russia collusion investigation led by special counsel Robert Mueller.

Mueller’s report later debunked the collusion allegations—but that didn’t stop Schiff, who had campaigned and fundraised heavily off impeachment, from  doubling-down on his investigations.

Gowdy also shredded Schiff’s decision to open a hearing with the director of national intelligence by fabricating an account of the phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy that spawned the whistleblower complaint.

 1
Adam Schiff / IMAGE: CSPAN via Youtube

Schiff claimed afterward that his performance was intended to be satirical, but he still was widely scorned for undermining what he and others, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, had disingenuously asserted was a “solemn” exercise of constitutional duty.

Gowdy said Pelosi already had wrested control of the impeachment proceedings away from Rep. Jerrold Nadler, the House Oversight chair, after Democrats were humiliated in a hearing with former Trump campaign adviser Corey Lewandowski.

It was shortly thereafter that the New York Times first published its account of the whistleblower, whose complaint was unrelated to anything Democrats had been outwardly investigating at the time.

“The question I have is how long is Speaker Pelosi gonna put up with Adam mishandling this investigation?” Gowdy wondered on Fox News.

“She’s already taken it away from Jerry Nadler,” he said. “But if you’re gonna do it, at least don’t screw it up, Adam!”

Gowdy noted that there was no apparent need for Schiff to have lied to the media, but that it was simply second nature to him.

“For anyone who wondered whether or not Adam Schiff could be objective and dispassionate—I never wondered that, but if any of your viewers did—now you know he makes up facts and openings, and he lies about meetings with the whistleblower, when the truth would have served him just fine!” Gowdy said. “He just decided to lie about it!”

Dems Now Aiming to Bring Down Pence, Install Pelosi in White House

0

‘Every word he utters in public is dissected, every move searched for signs of a coming coup…’

Trump Renews Calls for Unity and Greatness in SOTU Address
Mike Pence, Donald Trump and Nancy Pelosi during the State of the Union / IMAGE: Screenshot via Yahoo News

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) While President Donald Trump waged a vigorous defense against partisan House Democrats’ impeachment efforts, declaring his refusal to comply with the illegitimate investigation—at least until a floor vote occurred—some media outlets put the cart before the horse, shifting their focus to Vice President Mike Pence.

A story in The Atlantic sought to foment discord and attempt to erode solidarity between Trump and his second-in-command, suggesting the two had a fragile partnership and could soon become a threat.

“In any embattled White House, an ambitious vice president can run the risk of turning radioactive,” hyped the far-left rag. “Every word he utters in public is dissected, every move searched for signs of a coming coup.”

Popular as a driver of liberal talking points (the magazine helped rekindle the long dismissed debate over slavery reparations, for example) the piece almost seemed a road map to other media outlets that sought to pitch in with the all-hands-on-deck ploy to remove the president.

For Pence, it was a rare stroke of the ego in what has often been a relentlessly hostile press-corps that has honed in on his strong Christian values.

Not surprisingly, though, the Left’s endgame design has no intention of letting the former Indiana governor hold the top office for long.

Stories in The Washington Post and other outlets on Friday revealed that House Democrats had sent a new demand for documents—this time to Pence’s office.

The Post story seemed to take for granted the unproven allegations of Trump’s criminal misconduct for seeking the support of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy in an investigation of corruption tied with former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter.

Not only that, it claimed, but “President Trump repeatedly involved Vice President Pence in efforts to exert pressure on the leader of Ukraine at a time when the president was using other channels to solicit information that he hoped would be damaging to a Democratic rival,” said the article.

Although it claimed Trump’s use of Pence to support Ukrainian diplomacy (like his predecessor, Biden) was but one of many components in the president’s “hidden agenda” the article faulted Pence by claiming he would have had access to the transcript of Trump’s July 25 phone call with Zelenskiy.

“It’s also not clear whether Pence failed to read the White House account of the call in his briefing book or read it and found it unremarkable,” the article breathlessly emoted.

In response, Pence officials seemed to have clarified—to the chagrin of the Post reporters—that the latter was the case since the transcript altogether lacked the evidence of any nefarious plot.

Still, the media seemed to pivot back and forth between efforts to drive a wedge in the current White House and to implicate both top executives.

Third in line would be House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who launched and has been at the forefront of the dubious impeachment effort.

However, the prospect of a Pelosi presidency would almost assuredly undermine any hope the Left may have of using the Senate to remove the president and vice president—assuming no scandal involving her were to arise and foist the Oval Office onto Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Neb., the president pro tempore of the Senate.

‘Yang Gang’ Shells Out Big Bucks for Promise of Future Free Money

0

‘This grassroots fundraising total … ensures this campaign will have the funding to compete and outperform expectations through Super Tuesday and beyond…’

'Yang Gang' Shells Out Big Bucks for Promise of Future Free Money
Andrew Yang / IMAGE: CNBC

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) The gradual burnout of former front-runner Joe Biden‘s campaign, embroiled in pay-to-play scandals in Ukraine and China, has led many to shift attention to Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., who currently polls ahead in most surveys of the Democratic presidential primary pool.

But fundraising totals for the third quarter reveal another threat close on her heels in Andrew Yang.

Yang saw a 257 percent increase in fundraising for the quarter, reported Yahoo News.

The number may be misleading—his previous quarterly total was a paltry $2.8 million—the $10 million helps keep him in the conversation for now and could signal increasing momentum. It is just $1 million short of the total pull from political heavyweight Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif.

“This grassroots fundraising total, with more than $6 million in the bank, ensures this campaign will have the funding to compete and outperform expectations through Super Tuesday and beyond,” Yang’s campaign manager, Zach Graumann, told the New York Times.

By comparison, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders (who was forced to suspend his campaign this week due to heart trouble) raised a reported $25.3 million, the largest sum among Democrats and a 39 percent increase from the second quarter.

South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg—who, like Yang, has appealed to a younger demographic seeking a D.C. outsider with espoused moderate tendencies—reported $19.1 million, though he still polls well below the first tier of presidential hopefuls. The total was a 23 percent drop over his previous fundraising tally.

Like Warren, Buttigieg and others who have enjoyed their ‘audition’ moments, Yang has been regarded as a dark-horse candidate, unlikely to gain any real traction in the crowded field of seasoned politicians.

His signature agenda item—a universal basic income (UBI), paired with a campaign cash giveaway (the legality of which has raised some questions)—appears to resonate even more with younger voters than Warren’s socialist-tinged wealth-redistribution policies.

However, Yahoo said that after two well-received appearances on popular podcasts, “his bold ideas have been garnering attention, especially among the conservative youth of America.”

A business-savvy entrepreneur in the startup tech industry, Yang’s UBI proposals may be the ultimate in entitlement benefits for lower-end wage earners who stand to benefit and the ultimate tax for successful businesses and wealthy 1-percenters. For many in the middle, however, the $12,000 annual stipend—if universally applied—is effectively more like a tax rebate.

Detractors argue that it de-incentivizes the need or willingness to work and could potentially do little more than simply drive up inflation, creating more of a universal government dependency than economic stimulus.

It likely would promote more illegal immigration as well, and would raise questions of exactly how “unconditional” the eligibility really was.

Of course, the price tag—which Yahoo said would be an estimated $2- to $3-trillion per year—might still lead some to wonder where the money would come from.

But younger voters seem particularly open to it, even if it would raise the likelihood of borrowing into the future with massive deficits and inflation. Yang has gained a notable amount of traction through online media—not only podcast, but also memes and other types of platforms that are popular with millennials and post-millennials.

Should Yang rise to the front of the pack, his similarities with Trump as an outsider from the business world may shift the tone of the dialogue away from petty, partisan politics and more toward a long-term model of economic growth and prosperity.

However, several sharp contrasts remain—notably Yang’s relative youth, his tech savvy and his Asian heritage.

On Trump’s side, not only could he leverage his incumbency advantage (especially if the economy continues to flourish), but he also has a substantial lead on all the Democratic candidates in fundraising.

Amid House Democrats’ latest impeachment shenanigans, Trump was able to raise $15 million over the course of a single week. That brought his quarterly total up to a reported $125 million—which was more than double that of the top three Democrats combined.