In the furor of the last five days regarding the necessity to stabilize the U.S. economy that is in freefall, almost lost is the absolute necessity to make haste to find the cure for COVID-19. Yes, doctors are treating ill patients in dramatic numbers that are now seeming to double daily. Those certainly are the priorities of our amazing American hospitals, clinics, and specialists. I do not diminish treatment necessity at all. But while doing so, we need to take dramatic steps in preventions and to get those in place, functional, operating, and monitored ASAP.
Our “social distancing” in most cases, is working well. Multiple states have issued orders that have closed all businesses but those which are essential. That has put tens of millions of American workers on the sidelines. That horror has been consuming almost all the oxygen in the atmosphere. But we cannot ignore our requirement to find a cure.
And there may already be one. Watch and listen to this message from Dr. Vladimir Zelenko of New York:
At a Fox News “virtual town hall” Tuesday in the Rose Garden, Vice President Mike Pence was asked by Dr. Mehmet Oz, the popular TV doctor, how the distribution of the hydroxychloroquine treatment can be accelerated. Pence said, “there is no barrier,” explaining the FDA already has approved “off-label” use, meaning the drug used to treat malaria also can be prescribed to treat COVID-19. The vice president said the administration is working with Bayer on increasing the supply of the drug as clinical trials are being conducted.
“Doctors can prescribe that medication, which, as you know, is a perfectly legal malaria medication,” Pence said.
Oz asked Pence if he would allow himself to be treated with hydroxychloroquine if he were infected with the coronavirus. “I would follow the advice of my physician, and I would recommend everyone do that,” the vice president replied.
Oz has called chloroquine “the biggest game-changer of all,” with the potential of preventing the U.S. from “becoming Italy.”
President Trump announced Monday that clinical trials for chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine would begin in New York on Tuesday. He said 10,000 units of chloroquine would be distributed in the state. Studies in China, Australia, and France have found the combination of chloroquine and azithromycin treated the coronavirus within six days with a 100% success rate.
In an interview, Dr. Peter Costantino, the chairman of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City, was asked to comment on Dr. Zelenko’s reported results. “I’m very, very optimistic about this,” he said. “This is not a controlled study, but the number of patients represented by Dr. Zelenko is very significant.”
Costantino noted there were no hospitalizations, intubations, or deaths among Zelenko’s 350 patients. As many as 40 admissions would have been expected, he said, along with possibly two or three deaths.
Isn’t it sad that as this that is a logical and working treatment to stop coronavirus has been all but lost in the noise of politicizing for power and money this pandemic? Americans should be outraged at how many in Washington have been playing a game with coronavirus. While playing with the disease, they have put the lives of hundreds of millions of Americans at risk.
Pelosi’s bill offers a minuscule amount of taxpayer funding for curing this disease while filling the coffers and pockets of political party backers and federal workers that do nothing but cause the national debt to skyrocket: $2 Trillion!
I’ve been asked dozens of times the last week, “Is there anything we as American voters can do to shut down this lunacy in Congress? Can we stop this senseless wasteful spending?”
What have we at TruthNewsNetwork been harping on for five years now regarding American government: wasteful spending, political fraud, nepotism, and corruption — all for the quest for unilateral political POWER.
For those of you who have been skeptical, take a stroll to the corner of the two busiest streets in your town or city today. Look down both roads and notice NOBODY’S HOME!
We are close — so VERY close — to losing the greatest nation on Earth.
It is impossible that Pelosi, along with workers from her office were able to put the “Take REsponsibility for Workers and Family Act” together in just a few days. Pelosi knows that a “major” COVID-19 stimulus bill was in the offing, has been planning for the opportunity to jump into the fray at the last moment, and hold Americans hostage to a pork-ulus bill that is bulging with Democrat goodies. And that’s just what she has done, knowing that time is now on her side and that Republicans have very little power regarding whether or not to approve her bill.
I watched throughout the day on Tuesday as Democrat after Democrat found a television camera in front of which they to a person stated the Pelosi bill has NOTHING in it but measures to stop the coronavirus, funding emergency measures necessary to stop the virus spread while treating those already infected, assisting with measures to prevent further spreading, and economic stimulus measures for the American people. Each of those Democrats not only lied, but they in doing so are also trying to hijack the American financial system while piling up goodies that Democrats can use like Mardi Gras beads coming from a float in New Orleans. Every Mardi Gras, “Give me something, Mister!” is the common phrase for Louisianians to illustrate the pandemonium of Mardi Gras parades. It’s appropriate to say that “Give me something, Ms. Pelosi!” is the relevant cry being answered by the House Speaker with this package.
Her bill is 1400+ pages in length. It is packed full of pork. Because it is so long, she is confident there is not enough time for Republicans to read and digest its measures, determine which of the measures included are legitimate and which are partisan fodder for her party and their financial supporters. She’s done pretty well with that process in her House Speaker career. Who can forget how she rammed down the throats of Americans another bill about the same length a few years ago. When asked what was in that bill, she famously answered, “We don’t know what’s in the bill. We have to pass the bill so we can find out what’s in the bill.” That bill was Obamacare.
We’ve done the dirty work for you. Here in bullet point, we have identified almost every one of the items included in the bill. As you digest these, remember when asked yesterday was there a bunch of pork in the bill, this was her response:
“Every measure in the House Coronavirus bill is to support the necessary medical needs to stop the virus while shoring up the American economy for workers. We MUST assist American workers in keeping going without finding themselves in dire financial circumstances and without fear of the virus.”
Keep that in mind — you will not believe what you are about to see.
$100,000,000 to NASA
$20,000,000,000 to the US Postal Service to payoff their debt
$300,000,000 to the Endowment for the Arts
$300,000,000 for the Endowment for the Humanities (I’ve never heard of it)
$15,000,000 for Veterans Employment Training
$435,000,000 for mental health support
$30,000,000,000 for the Department of Education stabilization fund
$200,000,000 to Safe Schools Emergency Response to Violence Program
$300,000,000 to Public Broadcasting / NPR
$500,000,000 to Museums and Libraries
$720,000,000 to Social Security Admin, of which ONLY $200,000,000 goes to recipients. The balance is for “Administrative Costs” — $520,000,000.
$25,000,000 for Cleaning supplies for the Capitol Building (I know it’s unbelievable. You can find it on page 136)
$7,500,000 to the Smithsonian for additional salaries
$35,000,000 to the JFK Center for Performing Arts
$25,000,000 for salary increases for the House of Representatives
$3,000,000,000 to upgrade to the IT department at the Veterans Administration
$315,000,000 for State Department Diplomatic Programs
$95,000,000 for the Agency of International Development
$300,000,000 for International Disaster Assistance
$300,000,000 for Migrant and Refugee Assistance (pg 147)
$90,000,000 for the Peace Corp (pg 148)
$13,000,000 to Howard University (pg 121)
9,000,000 Miscellaneous Senate Expenses (pg 134)
$100,000,000 to Essential Air carriers (pg 162)
$40,000,000,000 goes to the “Take Responsibility to Workers and Families Act.” (Pg 164)
$1,000,000,000 Airlines Recycle and Save Program (pg 163)
$25,000,000 to the FAA for administrative costs (pg 165)
$492,000,000 to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) (pg 167)
$526,000,000 Grants to Amtrak to remain available if needed through 2021 (pg 168)
$25,000,000,000 for Transit Infrastructure (pg 169)
$3,000,000 Maritime Administration (pg 172)
$5,000,000 Salaries and Expenses for the Office of the Inspector General (pg 172)
A clause that ratifies there is No voter ID necessary to get a ballot to vote. It also establishes and makes legal the anonymous “ballot harvesting” process (pg 650)
$2,500,000 for Public and Indian Housing (pg 175)
$5,000,000 for Community Planning and Development (pg 175)
$2,500,000 for the Office of Housing
$1,500,000,000 for the Tenant-Based Rental Assistance Office of Public and Indian Housing, $billion of which can be used as “additional administrative and other expenses.” (pg 176)
$720,000,000 to the public housing fund (pg 177)
$100,000,000 for Community Block Grants for Native Americans (pg 183)
$250,000,000 for Housing Block Grants for Tribes (pg 182)
$130,000,000 for AIDS Housing (pg 185) $20,000,000 of which goes to “one-time grantees” (pg 186)
$15,000,000,000 for the Community Development Fund (pg 188)
$5,000,000,000 in Homeless Assistance (pg 193)
$100,000,000,000 for Rental Assistance (pg 198)
An additional $7,000,000 to enforce the Fair Housing Act (pg 203)
$227,000,000 for grants to States for “youth activities” (pg 80)
$261,000,000 for grants to States for dislocated worker employment and training activities, including supportive services and needs-related payments (pg 80)
$10,000,000 for the Migrant and Seasonal Farmworker program
$100,000,000 for ‘‘Job Corps.’’
$15,000,000 for ‘‘Program Administration’’
$6,500,000, to the ‘‘Federal Wage and Hour Division.’’
$30,000,000, to OSHA
$10,000,000 for Susan Harwood training grants
$1,300,000,000, for ‘‘Primary Health Care’’
$75,000,000, for ‘‘Student Aid Administration’’
$9,500,000,000, for ‘‘Higher Education’’
In this bill, Paid Family Leave for Sickness is two paid work weeks (pg 213). “Emergency Family Leave,” and now applies to all employers, not just for companies with over 500 employees (pg 208)
Guarantees paid leave to employees who have an in-law who gets sick (pg 209)
Opens up leave for some you are in a “committed relationships with” (pg 212)
$1,000,000,000 for more Obamaphones!
Odds and Ends…
$9,000,000,000 is allocated to colleges and universities
$100,000,000 to juvenile justice programs
It suspends various aspects of the enforcement of immigration laws
Hidden in these provisions is hundreds of billions of dollars in Green New Deal subsidies. Also hidden is the “ACCESS” Act that imposes requirements for states to allow early voting, voting by mail, and requires the mailing of absentee ballots to everyone.
In this bill, only $10 billion is set aside for infrastructure for fighting infectious diseases (pg 191), AND…
Hidden on page 174 the Secretary of the Treasury has only seven days from the date this bill is signed into law to allocate the funds & notify Congress
Plain and simple: I’m nauseated. I have never in my lifetime seen a more corrupt, dishonest, and massive display of evil in any branch of the U.S. government than this. And as deep as what we outlined for you, the underlying truth in each is eviler than its bullet point!
I was asked on Tuesday, “Why is Speaker Pelosi taking this action?” I have thought through this again and again, and I resolve the question in only one answer I can puzzle to: She wants to crash the U.S. economy and the lives of 300+ million Americans.
But why would she do that?
Could it be that she is so driven to and so set on destroying this presidency that she would take the entire nation down with President Trump?
Before you respond with, “No Way! — think it through. Remember this, HBO host Bill Marr has one more than one occasion stated he’d be fine if that happened just to rid the nation of Donald Trump.
For decades, members of Congress have taken advantage of financial details garnered from pending legislation or from those who are directly involved in specific business negotiations with Congress. It has been prevalent through the years for members to enrich themselves with suspect stock market transactions that could only have happened by their access to and then using that info.
Who would have thought that Coronavirus would have opened a door for our federal employees — members of the House and Senate — to take advantage of a pandemic that has 330 million Americans hiding under desktops in fear for their lives? But that is happening today. (Details of these just ahead)
Remember the words of President Obama’s Chief of Staff and later Mayor of Chicago Rahm Emanuel:
“You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it’s an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.”
That’s precisely what current members of Congress have been secretly doing. But it has happened often in the past but mostly just to make a lot of money by playing the Congressional Monopoly game!
“Let’s Make A Deal”
What’s happening now is NOT new. It’s been going on for decades. Before we tell you the latest, let’s look back a few years.
Then Rep. Tom Price (R-GA), President Donald Trump’s Health and Human Services secretary, when just a nominee was under siege — the harsh lights of a Senate hearing upon him. News reports showed he had bought shares in a tiny biotechnology company while sitting on committees that could influence the firm’s prospects. A colleague, Rep. Chris Collins (R-NY), had tipped him off to the investment.
Rep. Doug Lamborn, Republican of Colorado, bought shares of the same tiny Australian company, Innate Immunotherapeutics. Within two days, three more members also bought in — Republicans Billy Long of Missouri, Mike Conaway of Texas, and John Culberson of Texas. Conaway added more shares the following week.
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, the Rhode Island Democrat who sits on the Senate HELP Committee, which oversees health care, is a substantial investor in pharmaceutical stocks. As lawmakers closed in on a bipartisan deal over a significant medical research bill called the 21st Century Cures Act, Whitehouse bought shares in the pharmaceutical firms McKesson, Gilead, and Abbott Labs ten days before the bill was made public. Whitehouse and his wife bought additional stock in Gilead and Amgen two days before the House voted on the bill. The day President Barack Obama signed the bill into law, Whitehouse started a series of three sales of shares in those companies.
Rep. Adam Kinzinger, Republican of Illinois, was a guest speaker at Prescient Edge, a small research and technology firm with Defense Department contracts, in January of 2016. When the company raised private capital later that year, Kinzinger bought in to the tune of $20,002. Kinzinger was a member of theHouse Foreign Affairs Committee, which oversees issues affecting Prescient Edge.
Rep. Chuck Fleischmann, Republican of Tennessee, served on the health care appropriations panel. As then-Vice President Joe Biden was pressing lawmakers to approve funding for his “Cancer Moonshot” proposal in the summer of 2016, a Fleischmann family account invested in two companies, Juno Therapeutics, and Celgene, which were developing new cancer drugs. One of the investments was made a week before the Obama administration announced new measures that would speed up approval for cancer therapies.
384 House members and senators who served in the 114th Congress made no stock trades over two years. Meanwhile, the lawmakers who are active in stock trading conducted a total of more than 21,300 trades during the same two years, but a small group of very wealthy lawmakers accounted for a significant share of those trades.
Texas Republican Rep. Mike McCaul reported approximately 7,300 stock transactions in an array of industries over the two years. Oregon Democratic Rep. Kurt Schrader made a substantial number of trades in companies that have an interest in the committee’s health and energy work. Schrader made close to 700 stock trades over two years.
Instances of insider trading by members of Congress are not difficult to find. For example, in 2008, then-Congressman Spencer Bachus shorted the U.S. stock market one day after attending a confidential meeting with Henry (“Hank”) Paulson and Ben Bernanke, who at that time were the secretary of the Treasury and chairman of the Federal Reserve, respectively. At this meeting, which took place on Sept. 18, Bachus and other members of Congress were given material nonpublic information about the extent of the risks that were facing the financial system at that time.
John Boehner and Dick Durbin, both Senators at the time, also attended that closed-door meeting. Both of them placed orders selling shares in mutual funds the following day.
These are just a pittance of examples of those who have been found involved in unscrupulous stock dealings in the past. Discovering these transactions (which are publicly reported if one cares to dig to find them) show there is a strong propensity for many lawmakers to take advantage of “insider information” obtained by just being a member of Congress.
House and Senate members who are active traders insist their buying and selling is a normal part of managing their finances, as with any American who wants to save for retirement or put their kids through school. But their colleagues don’t seem to agree. The clear majority of lawmakers avoid potential conflicts of interest by buying mutual funds, putting their portfolios in blind trusts or simply staying out of the stock market. Wouldn’t that be the wise and ethical approach for those who have access to information that could possibly be used for self enrichment?
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), when just a Representative back in 2012, was slapped on the wrist by Congress for participating in several obvious personal enrichment transactions committed by her husband Paul Pelosi. Both the Senate and the House passed a bill —The Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act, or “STOCK Act.” The measure made it illegal for members of Congress to engage in insider trading. The act was passed in April 2012, during the presidency of Barack Obama.
The STOCK Act was fondly termed the “Pelosi Rule” by Republican members of Congress. Americans were happy that it appeared that a stop had been crafted for greedy public servants who seemed to always leave Congress as multi-millionaires when being just average economic Americans when entering Congress.
In April 2013, Congress amended the STOCK Act, loosening its financial disclosure requirements and making it more difficult for members of the public to access the required filings.
The STOCK Act outlawed insider trading by members of Congress.
The law was passed in April 2012 with strong bipartisan support.
In April 2013, key provisions of the law were weakened, reducing the safeguards against insider trading.
Does any of that surprise you?
“I’m deeply concerned,” said Minnesota Democratic Rep. Tim Walz, an early supporter of the Stock Act who does not himself trade stocks. “If you buy stock and then do something that changes that stock, you’ve got to know what’s going on.”
Trouble on the Hill: “Busted!”
What’s happening in Washington right now? We got through the Mueller Investigation, the impeachment trial of President Trump, and we’re eight months away from a presidential and Congressional election. What could possibly go wrong now? Coronavirus!
Do you remember the statement above of Rahm Emanuel?
“You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it’s an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.”
Coronavirus is certainly a horror for every American. But several in Congress in the shadow of the current pandemic found a way to make a few quick bucks. If you haven’t heard, it’s because you’ve been asleep or are fasting news coverage.
Four senators dumped millions of dollars worth of stock while Capitol Hill was being briefed on the threat of coronavirus but before the markets tanked as infections soared, disclosure records have revealed.
Republicans Richard Burr, Kelly Loeffler and James Inhofe and Democrat Dianne Feinstein collectively offloaded up to $11 million in stock between late January and early February, according to disclosure records.
Burr, chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee that was directly briefed on coronavirus, sold up to $1.7 million in stock including in hotels, according to reporting from ProPublica. To put Burr’s actions in context, his last financial disclosure form filed with the Senate showed his total net worth at $1 million. Yet, ProPublica reported he sold $1.7 million. Why and how could the Senator sell stock he reportedly did not own? Did he come into stock ownership to that level between the time of his disclosure statement and the coronavirus attacking the stock market?
Burr’s spokeswoman said in a statement to DailyMail.com that Burr filed his financial disclosure form several weeks before the markets showed ‘volatility.’
Feinstein, a member of the same committee, sold up to $6 million in stock including in a biotech firm.
Loeffler dumped up to $3.1million in investments starting on the day the Senate Health Committee, which she sits on, was briefed by the CDC. Meanwhile, James Inhofe sold up to $400,000 in stock, including real estate.
Loeffler and Feinstein have defended themselves, saying their stocks are invested in trusts and portfolios that they have no personal control over. Inhofe has not commented.
Numerous times you have witnessed TruthNewsNetwork asking a question in stories and podcasts, “What’s Going On?” We’re asking it again.
It is obvious that politicos in Congress have bountiful opportunities for self-enrichment once seated in the House or Senate. It cannot be happenstance that so many enter Congress with modest net worth only to leave their post years later worth millions. That is NOT normal and is obviously based on enrichment opportunities not available to the general public. And they are OUR employees.
That “Pelosi Rule” that was passed and signed into law by President Obama was little more than a straw gift given to Americans to show “We in Congress are going to police ourselves and make sure NO ONE cheats regarding stock trading.”
In YOUR world, do you know of any other public entity (like Congress) in which workers can cheat, take advantage unethically and illegally to make money and there’s no accountability to anyone for those actions? In many respects, it reminds me of that old saying, “That’s kinda’ like the prisoners, not the guards, guarding the prisoners.” Self-policing seldom works, especially when it comes to someone else’s money.
What is most objectionable to me about this has not changed since I first discovered it. These 535 elected officials took an oath of office to serve us — all of us. They’re paid well — far better than are average Americans. Doors they certainly would never know of open to them as they meet and interact with those in business while in office. That’s normal. But there’s NO honest explanation for the actions you are hearing about from these today.
In the REAL world, here’s how this would be structured:
Before taking the oath of office, each member of Congress would be required to either divest 100% of their personal holding other than a retirement plan already in place and then to place ALL of their personal and business assets remaining in valid Blind Trusts in which they nor their spouses or children have any knowledge of or control of any kind.
No member of Congress would be allowed to receive any compensation of any kind — other than their published Congressionally controlled income and expenses while serving their term in office — PERIOD.
NO lobbying of members of Congress or any person serving in the White House or a cabinet position can participate in any type of lobbying as defined in existing U.S. law. Under NO circumstances can any member of Congress receive any kind of compensation from lobbyists. That includes payment of any kind — direct, indirect, or even in-kind. That prohibition applies to the immediate family members of those in Congress.
Finally, and most importantly, any member of Congress found to have violated any of these will immediately be removed from their office in Congress. Further, the Department of Justice will immediately file charges for felony violations against those former members of Congress AND any person or persons who participated in facilitating this illegal process.
Does that sound somewhat radical? What is the role of serving in Congress? TO REPRESENT US…PERIOD. No longer should Americans feel that “serving in Congress” is really “serving.” Being in Congress really means “obtaining unscrupulous if not illegal opportunities to personally enrich oneself, trying to gain as much wealth as possible by walking as close as possible to the ‘felony line’ without stepping across it.”
Here’s a challenge: ask your members of Congress from your district and state if they would support a law that prohibits “extra” compensation based on the points above? Most will say, “I’d have to see the bill before I could commit to support it.” When they say that, ask them this, “Would you create such a bill and promote it in Congress?”
I guarantee the answer will be a resounding “No” with a plethora of excuses.
Sad, isn’t it. Sad mostly that so many take advantage of it and us. But it’s saddest that so many do it at all and think nothing of doing so.
That says a lot about them. Who in God’s name have we put in charge of creating the laws of our nation?
Harvey Weinstein heard his fate from a New York judge on Wednesday. Harvey is old, riddled with medical complexities, and is facing 20+ years in prison for rape and sexual assault. Without some type of pardon, Harvey will probably die behind bars.
That was not supposed to happen to Harvey. He, for decades, had significant political influence. No one on Earth contributed more money through the years to the Clintons than did Weinstein. Beginning with Bill’s first run for the White House, then for Clinton’s second term in office, Hillary’s Senate campaigns and then her two runs for president, Weinstein just handed his wallet over to the pair. But he did more than just that. When he reached his legal maximum in contributions, he began bundling for the Clintons. He is personally responsible for millions of campaign dollars for the Clintons’ various campaigns through three decades. In return, he planned to cash-in his political chits called “Influence.”
Where is Harvey’s political influence today? He’s going to die in jail.
Political influence flows through the streets of Washington, like floodwaters. It seems today that everything there is for sale. And it all has a price. Members of Congress may not sell their votes on specific issues. But when the lobbyist calls who three years ago got one’s grandson an internship that paid 15% more than it should have, that member of Congress is going to take that call — and listen. The lawmaker sold his or her political influence.
In the early 90s, I had just turned the corner with my newly formed company that had taken off after three typical years of struggling to get started. I was an active young man in our community that was well known, and (I thought) had a promising future. One day, three gentlemen walked into my office to meet with me. All three were good friends. One was a local school superintendent, one was a real estate developer, and the other was a longtime State Representative who was leaving that office to run for governor.
I was surprised but pleased to see these three. But I was shocked when I heard the reason for their visit: they wanted me to run to replace the representative in state government!
It took me a few moments to come back to Earth. I sat in silence for a moment and felt unexpected nausea rising in my throat. I didn’t understand and didn’t know then why I said what I said next, but I do know why now.
“There is NO way I will run for that office and I will NEVER run for ANY political office!”
That night I shared the experience with my wife. She looked at me with wide-eyes and asked, “Why did you say no?”
I had thought it through after the three left my office and reached a conclusion for my nausea and quick declination. I shared this with my wife: “I would always feel obligated to someone if I was a politician. And I don’t think I could ever get accustomed to that.”
I’m not a superhero or some perfect soul, by any means. But after their question and my answer sunk-in, I reasoned why I told my wife what I did: I could most definitely NOT have run a successful and winning campaign for the House of Representatives using just the money I had. There wasn’t much money available! A run for that office — ANY office — would require my asking for campaign contributions. I could not (and still cannot) envision a scenario in which I would be able to say “No” to a person who had contributed to my campaign if and when asked for a favor of any kind.
Several years later, I heard Rush Limbaugh respond on-air to a caller who asked him why he did not run for political office. His response was very similar to mine.
Don’t get me wrong: campaign contributions are necessary for today’s political system. There are certainly those who can access the political contribution system well and can then legislate with no arbitrary sense of obligations to supporters who may have contributed. I’m glad there are those public servants. I didn’t think I could do that!
There’s a multi-billion dollar industry that exists for one reason only: to use money and favors to purchase political influence from American politicians. It’s housed in law firms and marketing firms, almost all located on K Street in Washington, D.C.
Let’s take a quick look at just one race: the 2016 presidential general election race between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump:
Hillary Clinton raised $866.6 Million from individuals and companies; $201.5 Million from SuperPacs = $1,068,100,000 (that’s “Billion”)
Donald Trump raised $453.1 Million from individuals and companies; $59.1 Million from SuperPacs = $512.2 Million (Trump of that amount personally donated $100 Million of that number)
Think about just how much money was contributed to those in the same election who ran for the House and Senate, to candidates for governor, mayor, state legislators, local city council seats and even dog catchers! The total must be tens of billions of dollars.
Let me ask this question: knowing how the process exists, knowing WHY it exists, and, more importantly, knowing that “The love of money is the root of all evil,” why is this entire process still allowed in the United States?
I am a strict capitalist. I have started several companies. When doing so, I, in advance, puzzled through all the obvious obstacles I would face, determined when moving forward what was my overall objective of the company, how to achieve it, and then carefully put in place all the necessary resources for that objective. Those resources included infrastructure, personnel, operating necessities, and, of course, capital to power the ship.
The beauty and untarnished concept of capitalism worked perfectly in my case: all those companies did not succeed as hoped and as planned. But what determined their success or failure had nothing to do with anything but me and how I missed or hit the right stages in building and growing that company. What was at the end of a win in doing so? Financial freedom, a tremendous sense of accomplishment and value along with numerous OTHER opportunities.
Politics is not different at all. Someone seizes the same thoughts, ideas, and plans. The same requirements are there to build that idea and make it grow. It requires opportunity, infrastructure, personnel, operating necessities, and of course, capital. The difference between an entrepreneurial startup company and a life in politics is found in one word that is a necessity in both: money.
This process was created to keep as much of the graft and political influence as possible from impacting elections. Money is the single largest energy source to make possible a win.
How do we stop all these dollars flowing into elections to, in essence, buy election results?
That has been addressed over and over again, year after year, decade after decade, for several hundred years! The most recent solution was “Campaign Reform.” Total reform seemed to be the only way to stop our steady move to an environment in which the candidate with the most money would win every election.
Let me throw a monkey wrench into the thinking on that. Take a listen to George Will, who explains what Campaign Reform is:
Wow! So is there any way to keep the political influence that results from campaign contributions impacting election results?
The answer is to eliminate SuperPacs. The problem in accomplishing that is the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court ruled in a famous case called “Citizens United” that SuperPacs can open the cash register at will to fund elections!
A super PAC is a modern breed of a political action committee that’s allowed to raise and spend unlimited amounts of money from corporations, unions, individuals, and associations to influence the outcome of state and federal elections. The rise of the super PAC was heralded as the beginning of a new era in politics in which elections would be determined by the vast sums of money flowing into them, leaving average voters with little to no influence.
A Political Action Committee (PAC) compared to a Super Pac
The most important difference between a super PAC and traditional candidate PAC is in who can contribute, and in how much they can give.
Candidates and traditional candidate committees can accept $2,700 from individuals per election cycle. There are two election cycles a year: one for the primary, the other for the general election in November. That means they can take in a maximum of $5,400 a year — half in the primary and a half in the general election. Candidates and traditional candidate committees are prohibited from accepting money from corporations, unions, and associations. Federal election code prohibits those entities from contributing directly to candidates or candidate committees. Super PACs, though, have no limitations on who contributes to them or how much they can spend on influencing an election. They can raise as much money from corporations, unions, and associations as they please and spend unlimited amounts on advocating for the election or defeat of the candidates of their choice. Also, Super Pacs, in some cases, do NOT have to reveal sources of contributions.
How do we stop this crazy spending on elections to assure elected candidates are those best qualified for the job and not just the one with the most “connected” campaign funding sources? Get rid of SuperPacs! Since the Supreme Court already ruled in Citizens United that cannot happen, how can we rid the system of those SuperPacs? With a new law.
Who makes those “new” laws? Congress. And the fact that members of Congress are the chief beneficiaries of SuperPacs, it will be tough at best to get a change.
In the interim, I suggest you pay close attention to all those who run for elections that directly impact you: from the White House, Congress, your state and city. When you find a candidate with whom you agree, get the facts of their campaign contributions and contributors. If those dollars come chiefly from SuperPacs, be cautious.
There is no panacea for this. Americans need to pressure members of Congress to write a NEW law that addresses each of the reasons for the SCOTUS overturn of Citizens United. That needs to happen NOW.
The grim Reaper gleefully looks in using money to change our lives to be the way HE wants them to with no regard for you or me.
President Trump hinted that he believes that Democrats have only just begun in their impeachment frenzy to run him out of the White House.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat, said Thursday that Trump investigations will go on.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler of New York said after his impeachment acquittal that it’s “likely” the Ukraine probe will go on. His committee also has been investigating any Trump-Russia election conspiracy.
Mr. Trump said of Mr. Nadler: “I always beat him, and I had to beat him another time and I will probably have to beat him again because if they find that I happen to walk across the street and maybe go against the light or something, let’s impeach him.”
“Of course, they’re going to try again,” said Pam Bondi, a former Florida attorney general and member of the president’s Senate trial defense team, on Fox News.
“The unwillingness of the Democrats to accept the results of their gross abuse of their constitutional power is a crime against the public trust,” John M. Dowd, Mr. Trump’s former defense counsel, stated.
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA)
Still pending is a wide-open probe launched by Rep. Adam Schiff, California Democrat. Mr. Schiff has been investigating President Trump, his family, and businesses, the Trump Organization, over the congressman’s suspicions of blackmail, money laundering, and bribery. Republican staffers say the inquiry was put on hold last fall, pending the Ukraine impeachment proceedings led by Mr. Schiff. But there is no sign Mr. Schiff has given up trying to prove Mr. Trump is corrupt, and if the president is impeached again, the charges would likely come from this probe, informed sources said.
Schiff, chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, announced an anti-Trump staff investigation on February 6, way back in 2019. That’s the date he took control of the committee. Some of his allegations mirror claims pushed by opposition research firm Fusion GPS and its co-founder Glenn Simpson — organizers of the discredited Democratic Party-funded dossier spread all over Washington.
Schiff’s Trump plans came one month before former special counsel Robert Mueller released an extensive report whose bottom line was: no Trump-Russia election conspiracy.
Schiff’s allegations, which remain under investigation:
• Money laundering. Schiff said: “During the prior Congress, the Committee began to pursue credible reports of money laundering and financial compromise related to the business interests of President Trump, his family, and his associates. The President’s actions and posture towards Russia during the campaign, transition, and administration have only heightened fears of foreign financial or other leverage over President Trump and underscore the need to determine whether he or those in his Administration have acted in service of foreign interests since taking office.”
The Mueller report didn’t mention any financial ties between Trump and the Kremlin. The President’s former attorney, Michael Cohen, told the committee he knew of no Russian money flowing into the Trump Organization, the president’s real estate development firm.
• Russia conspiracy. Schiff said: “The extent of any links and/or coordination between the Russian government, or related foreign actors, and individuals associated with Donald Trump’s campaign, transition, administration, or business interests, in furtherance of the Russian government’s interests.”
• Blackmail. Schiff said: “Whether any foreign actor has sought to compromise or holds leverage, financial or otherwise, over Donald Trump, his family, his business, or his associates.” He continued: “Whether President Trump, his family, or his associates are or were at any time at heightened risk of, or vulnerable to, foreign exploitation, inducement, manipulation, pressure, or coercion, or have sought to influence U.S. government policy in service of foreign interests.”
In the year since Mr. Schiff released this road map, there have been no leaks to the media, perhaps an indication he had not found evidence before he shifted to impeachment. None of these allegations surfaced in the Mueller report nor during the Schiff-led impeachment drive.
Rep. Schiff’s spokesman didn’t respond to the message seeking comment.
They Just Keep On Keepin’ On!
GOP staffers say that Schiff has not given up on proving money laundering, which supposedly revolves around President Trump’s bank, Deutsche Bank, and Russia, or perhaps around an aborted bid to build a hotel in Moscow in 2015-16.
“Schiff will try to redeem himself by continuing his investigations, accompanied by the usual slew of misleading leaks to masochistic reporters, into Trump’s connections to both Russia and Ukraine,” one Republican staffer. “He’ll probably go back after Trump-Russia money laundering, which is one of Schiff’s favorite conspiracy theories. He doesn’t know if it’s Russians laundering money for Trump through the NRA, Trump properties, Deutsche Bank, or the Trump Tower Moscow project, but he’s convinced that somewhere, somehow, something happened.”
One of Fusion GPS’s allegations is that Russians provided illegal campaign donations to the National Rifle Association’s political action committee. The NRA denied this in letters to the Senate.
Meanwhile, Mr. Nadler put together a legal staff that has accused Mr. Trump of transgressions outside the Ukraine storyline. Lawyers Norman Eisen and Barry H. Berke have depicted Mr. Trump as a criminal and liar involved in several conspiracies. They wrote that Trump people could be implicated in Russian online trolling and for “aiding and abetting” computer hacking.
In announcing Mr. Eisen, a former Obama administration attorney, and Mr. Berke, a longtime Democratic donor, as consultants, Nadler released 81 letters to Trump associates demanding various documents.
Nadler also has been investigating whether the President obstructed justice in the Mueller probe, but did not include that offense in his impeachment articles. Mueller brought no conspiracy charges against any Trump ally.
Nadler has not announced an end to these probes.
“Just because President Trump has been acquitted by the Senate, paradoxically that doesn’t mean the congressional investigations will end,” J.D. Gordon, a Trump campaign national security adviser said. “The House committees will keep on pursuing obstruction allegations related to Trump-Russia, and keep digging for new details on Trump-Ukraine. That’s in addition to their wide-ranging probes on his taxes, bank loans, and financial history. Plus, anything else that might help build a case in the media for a historic second impeachment. There is nothing stopping them.”
Meanwhile, the Rest of the Dems?
A growing number of House Democrats seem to have abandoned their ongoing investigation into the Trump administration’s official dialogue with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy. Fewer Democrats have made new witness requests and filed subpoenas since the Senate impeachment trial acquitted President Donald Trump of abusing power and obstructing justice on Feb. 5.
The lack of interest in continuing the probe came even though the Democratic Party had claimed the president’s foreign policy was risking national security and the integrity of the next general election to be held on Nov. 3.
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) suggested his fellow party members have moved on the belief the president cannot be found guilty of abusing power and obstructing justice.
“There is nothing that Donald Trump can do that would cause Senate Republicans to convict him of high crimes and misdemeanors,” he said, according to Fox News. “So that has caused everybody in the House to take a deep breath and figure out what our next steps are.”
Democrats also appear to have noticed the results of a recent Gallup poll that revealed support for the president and Republican Party has soared, following the recent appointment of Vice President Mike Pence to a new task force handling the nation’s response to the novel coronavirus.
“A poll says that 77 percent of U.S. adults have confidence in their government’s ability to handle the coronavirus (number one) compared to other health threats,” the president said on Twitter. “Confidence was 64 percent for zika, 58 percent for ebola others way down on the list.”
The president believes the poll results also show health professionals are doing a “great job.”
“Gallup poll numbers on the handling of this situation are outstanding, the best,” he said on Twitter. “Thank you.”
These results prompted House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) to concede he expects the incumbent president to defeat the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee on Election Day.
“The president’s misconduct cannot be decided at the ballot box, for we cannot be assured that the vote will be fairly won,” he said.
Schiff also hinted he regretted focusing too much on Russia instead of delivering results for people living in his Californian district.
“As one witness put it during our impeachment inquiry, the United States aids Ukraine and her people so that we can fight Russia over there, and we do not have to fight Russia here,” he said.
Wouldn’t it be ironic if the coronavirus would be the “thing” that would wreck Democrats’ impeachment Part Two hopes to rid the nation of a “President” Donald Trump? Keep that thought in the back of your mind. Why?
Democrats need a “foil” — an excuse with which they thought they could morph it into Articles of Impeachment.
They thought they had one: “President Trump has shirked his responsibilites as Commander in Chief by not taking steps in time to prepare the Nation for coronavirus. His lack of vision and knowledge of how to govern cannot be allowed to stand. He’s already shown the world he’ll attack any foreign adversary that has angered him taking no thought of its potential damage to Americans. Now he’s letting a pandemic sweep across the country while telling us all not to panic!” (It isn’t working)
Americans have awakened to the hypocrisy of the Left: African-Americans, Latinos, wealthy, middle class, Christians, Jews, Muslims, native-born and immigrants have realized that his promises are steadily making life better for Americans — ALL Americans. They, for the first time in a long time peering through the veil of elitism and the propaganda of the Press and are rejecting the lies.
The Left is in panic mode. They’ve tried everything they could think of to take Trump down. But they forgot about one crucial factor: Americans. They have exposed what the Ruling Class thinks of you and me. They believe we’re if not dumb, a bit slow: at least slower than are they. They feel we trust them without question. That is because, for decades, many Americans did and did so blindly.
We at TruthNewsNetwork told you the first day we went live two years ago with our podcast that we would always give you the truth. We understand that all you need are facts. Facts tell the story — the entire story! That’s something we have seldom heard from Washington in a long time. We have been spoon-fed just the tidbits they want us to have: just enough to keep us reliant on them.
They have had us blinded. Every day they realize Americans have slowly awakened and are now in rapidly growing numbers recognizing the differences between propaganda and facts. President Trump’s clear message to Americans has opened the doors of political consciousness among the U.S. citizenry that has slept for many years. And Democrats and those farther left are petrified to know that now WE KNOW!
You Shall Know the Truth and the Truth Will Set You Free
You can have stark differences with the President. That’s easy for many to do. But one thing that cannot be said about him is that he runs from a fight. No one in my life in any White House has worked so diligently to expose the corruption among Washington elites. Yes, they exist. Yes, there is a Deep State. Yes, Their justice under federal law is different from mine. If you want to argue that point, pull up a chair. There are far too many specific examples for me to share with you than you think exist. We’re going to be here a while.
Americans believe that the two-tiered justice system has existed for a long time. But no one has been able to nail it down. Or maybe we haven’t seen proof of it because no one WANTED to nail it down. (The latter is probably correct) Want some recent examples?
Attorney General Eric Holder. When Obama took office, the DOJ had already launched a very public investigation into the racial election intimidation by two Black Panthers in a wealthy, mostly white suburb of Philadelphia. The two on election day stood in front of the door to the polling precinct in full militant garb. Voters were petrified. The Bush DOJ ramped up that investigation. Holder, on orders from the NEW president, terminated the case. Was it racial? You be the judge. But it certainly was an example of two-tiered justice.
FBI Director James Comey. The fact that he lied several times while under oath is uncontroverted. Additionally, he leaked classified information purposely to a “friend” for the express purpose of leaking it to the press. His doing that was a felony. Comey was severely chastised in Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s report for numerous offenses while in office. He committed federal crimes — no charges made, no investigation, no charges pending.
Hillary Clinton. She transmitted for several years classified emails to and from numerous government officials using an illegal personal server that had not been registered with the State Department, had not been examined by State Department IT officials, and was not certified for use regarding classified information. Each instance of an email being sent or received on that server was a felonious action.
Barack Obama. That Clinton email server? Obama, during his presidency, corresponded using a secret Gmail email name. He frequently sent to and received from Ms. Clinton classified emails — dozens if not hundreds. Again, each such transmission broke a federal felony statute.
Andrew McCabe. The former FBI #2 was outed in the Horowitz investigation for lying to investigators. Horowitz referred McCabe for prosecution. A grand jury looked at the charges and investigated. Nothing happened for several years, and subsequently, the case was dropped.
John Brennan. Brennan, as CIA Director, lied while under oath in his Senate testimony. When asked by Sen. Feinstein (D-CA), if the CIA had ever electronically surveilled members of the Senate, he answered they had not. It was later proven the CIA did just that and did it with not only Brennan’s knowledge but at his direction.
We could keep going throwing out names of past members of the government, several members of Congress, and numerous individuals that worked for the government but not in appointed positions. That list is exhaustive. There’s no need for us to do that. We all now know — especially after three years of the Mueller Investigation replete with constant lies and misrepresentations — members of the federal government, for the most part, get different and very partial treatment regarding being held accountable for illegal actions on their part.
This once again became front and center with the craziness of Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) on the steps of the Supreme Court on Wednesday when he with a bullhorn spoke to a crazed crowd in anger regarding a case the Court heard at that exact moment. The case was regarding a Louisiana law that requires all doctors who conduct abortions in the state have Admitting Status with a hospital close to the abortion clinic being used. The law’s purpose is to mandate immediate medical help for anyone that requires emergency treatment as a result of the abortion.
Schumer using the bullhorn threatened Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh if they chose to support that law. If you didn’t see or hear those few words of his threat, here it is again:
The current Senate Minority leader threatened the two Justices — an unprecedented act committed by the Number two U.S. Senator.
Thursday, on the floor of the Senate, all expected an apology from Schumer. He did NOT apologize. He gave “reasons” for his saying so — “excuses.” One could easily reconcile that Schumer was caught-up in a heated political demonstration about the most polarizing political policy in American history — abortion –, but that would be disingenuous. By federal statute, he broke the law in making those threats.
We at TruthNewsNetwork decided to turn to a professional — a lawyer AND a sitting member in the leadership of the U.S. House of Representatives, Congressman Mike Johnson (R-LA). He had some very enlightening things to say about not only Sen. Schumer’s actions, but the current state of “Equal Justice Under the Law” in the U.S. Click on the link below to hear Congressman Mike Johnson answer my questions:
Congressman Johnson more than just agrees our justice system is in danger. He also agrees that we have problems that are evident, serious, and need to be addressed. He lives in the mess we call “The Swamp” and knows first-hand how the elitest tags given to certain people who are part of the Swamp allow them to live and abide by different rules than other Americans.
All the wrongdoing listed above by those political insiders will NEVER be prosecuted!
Just imagine if you were James Comey, Eric Holder, Andrew McCabe or even Chuck Schumer and you did just one of the many things those were guilty of. If you did, you’d spend a long time in jail! This is not the way this nation was founded. In fact, our leaders through decades have let the sharp edges of Justice carve out specific guidelines called “Laws” by which we are governed and by which we live. They prayed our nation would never slip into the merry-go-round of partisanship in which we find ourselves today.
Thankfully, it has been exposed. That is the beginning of getting this issue resolved.
Remember this: it did not happen quickly — it will not be repaired quickly. Patience is not much of a virtue for many of us. But our opinions on timing are immaterial. It is OUR responsibility to remind our government members of their commitments to the Rule of Law. And if they continue to perpetuate that second tier of justice, we need to at the ballot box remove them from their power seat and replace them with those who will honor their oaths of office and complete the restoration of our nation to a Justice for All America!
Seldom do we get two such compelling stories at the same time — especially involving a former Secretary of State and presidential candidate, but the Senate Minority Leader. But they’re both here in the TruthNewsNetwork bullseye.
Hillary in Trouble
This goes all the way back to the FBI’s “investigation,” if you can call it that, into the misuse of her private email server in transmitting and receiving classified emails from a host of government officials. And we thought the “Hillary 2016 Madness” was over!
It stems from alleged security breaches involving a former foreign policy adviser to former President Barack Obama. They will be revisited in court after a judge agreed to allow further questioning on March 2.
D.C. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth has granted a request from conservative nonprofit Judicial Watch to order Hillary Clinton to deliver a sworn deposition about allegations the former secretary of state used a private email address to handle official government matters.
The approval came despite Clinton’s claim that she should not be required to answer the allegations since she had already done so, and no charges were made against the Democratic presidential candidate for the 2016 general election.
“As extensive as the existing record is, it did not sufficiently explain Secretary Clinton’s state of mind when she decided it would be an acceptable practice to set up and use a private server to conduct [U.S.] State Department business,” Lamberth said. “Those responses were either incomplete, unhelpful, or cursory at best. , put her responses left many more questions than answers.”
The main point of contention is there is no way to confirm exactly how the former secretary of state came to the understanding the State Department would protect her private emails. She “assumed” record management employees working for the department knew her private email server. They had no such knowledge and had not (as was required) tested and approved that private server.
It was also unclear how Clinton could argue that using a private server to perform State Department business was not against the law. Think about it: not only was the Secretary’s emails sent and received with NO internet security at all, President Obama using a private Gmail address communicated with her on that same server. That means his emails were “up for grabs” by anyone who could grab them. And numerous 14-year-old U.S. computer hackers could do so with NO difficulty. Imagine what the Chinese and Russians were able to do.
The judge was also not in favor of allowing Clinton to answer questions in writing because there was no guarantee the method would not “muddle any understanding of Secretary Clinton’s state of mind.”
“It would also fail to capture the full picture, thus delaying the final disposition of this case even further,” he said.
The court has also allowed Judicial Watch to subpoena Google for documents and records that might shed light on Clinton’s email activity. At the same time, she was secretary of state between the years 2009 and 2013.
The judge dismissed the Department of Justice’s earlier explanation that the court has enough evidence to decide whether the state performed an “adequate search.”
“This claim is preposterous, especially when considering state’s deficient representations regarding the existence of additional Clinton emails,” Lamberth said according to a statement. “Even though many important questions remain unanswered, the Justice Department inexplicably still takes the position that the court should close discovery and rule on dispositive motions. The court is especially troubled by this.”
Judicial Watch welcomed the judge’s decision and hopes revisiting the case will provide answers in the public interest.
“Judicial Watch uncovered the Clinton email scandal, and we are pleased that the court authorized us to depose Mrs. Clinton directly on her email conduct and how it impacted the people’s ‘right to know’ under Freedom of Information Act,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in the statement.
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY): A Felony?
Wednesday, as the Supreme Court heard arguments about a Louisiana case, Sen. Schumer in front of the Court ranted, raved, and threatened Supreme Court justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. You make a determination for yourself if his words are actual threats:
It was so disturbing, it prompted Chief Justice John Roberts to respond to Schumer saying,
“This morning, Senator Schumer spoke at a rally in front of the Supreme Court while a case was being argued inside. Senator Schumer referred to two Members of the Court by name and said he wanted to tell them that “You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You will not know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.” Justices know that criticism comes with the territory, but threatening statements of this sort from the highest levels of government are not only inappropriate, they are dangerous. All Members of the Court will continue to do their job, without fear or favor, from whatever quarter.”
It quickly became apparent that Schumer committed a “boo-boo.” His office released a response to Justice Roberts in the form of a memo:
“Sen. Schumer’s comments were a reference to the political price Senate Republicans will pay for putting these justices on the court, and a warning that the justices will unleash a major grassroots movement on the issue of reproductive rights against the decision,” Goodman claimed. “For Justice Roberts to follow the right wing’s deliberate misinterpretation of what Sen. Schumer said, while remaining silent when President Trump attacked Justices Sotomayor and Ginsberg last week, shows Justice Roberts does not just call balls and strikes.”
What does the Law Say?
Threatening government officials of the United States is a felony under federal law. According to the federal statutes, there are three elements of the offense of making an illegal threat: (i) there must be a transmission in interstate commerce; (ii) there must be a communication containing the threat; (iii) and the threat must be a threat to injure the person of another. Schumer’s rant was definitely made in public and seen on television and online, (“transmission in interstate commerce”) He definitely threatened both justices, (“a communication containing the threat”). The only question is about section iii, “must be a threat to injure the person of another.” This statement may add clarity to this: “In determining what constitutes a true threat, the courts hold that what must be proved is that a reasonable recipient of the communication would consider it a threat under the circumstances.”
The bottom line is that a court would be the true arbiter of whether Schumer actually broke the law. His staff rushed to issue a response to the Chief Justice to prevent any legal action being instigated. But their statement is riddled with lies. He did not refer to the Republican Party or Congress. He waved over his head at the Supreme Court building!
We have two serious incidents we are looking at today: committed by former Senator, former Secretary of State, and two-time presidential candidate Hillary Clinton; Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Senate Minority Leader. Hillary is facing a judge (for the first time) for her gross mishandling of classified top secret communications with dozens of senior government officials, one of whom was President of the United States. Schumer actually threatened what could only be physical action against Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh.
Both indeed deny any wrongdoing. But who would expect less than that from the pair? Both surely knew when conducting their business in such a fashion that they were in the wrong. Hillary used the secret server to prevent her electronic communications from being part of the trove of official State Department documents. Schumer was being Schumer: a proud, arrogant elitist who acts out daily his role as being above the Law. Neither feels any responsibility for their actions being wrong. They both made horribly egregious actions on their part ordinary in each situation.
And these were and are two of the most influential people in Washington!
I love communications today — especially the ability for us to see and hear items of importance as they happen 24/7. “Swamp People” who feel they own Washington are almost daily exposed for their actions that are at least disgraceful and possibly illegal — over and over and over. And they don’t care how it impacts all Americans.
You can bet we are just scratching the surface of the evil in Washington. I’m confident that President Trump knew of wrongdoing in D.C. before his inauguration. I bet he had NO idea how deep was the Swamp and evil are the “Swamp People!” As critters who live in the Swamp are prone to do, these are daily fighting the guy who is committed to rid the Swamp of all the critters who live there. Their methods so far have failed. And he keeps peeling back the layers of the onion, revealing more and more of the horrors lying beneath.
Will Hillary survive this trip to the Judge’s whipping chamber? Will Schumer skate from his not-so-subtle veiled threats against Gorsuch and Kavanaugh?
Answer: If you did any of the things alleged of Hillary or if you on a bullhorn standing in front of the Supreme Court said what Schumer said, you’d awaken in jail tomorrow and every other tomorrow for years to come. Hillary and Chuck are bureaucratic and liberal stars in the Swamp. If anything happens to them, it will be the first such REAL legal action to be taken against any “Swamp People” in my recent memory.
Clinton and Schumer should be held accountable for breaking federal laws and committing felonies. Clinton and Schumer MUST be held accountable: “Equal Justice under the Law.”
This story comes as a direct result of the story and podcast published yesterday, February 20, 2020, that was centered around the bold actions of three U.S. Senators along with former Secretary of State John Kerry. Those three plus Kerry took it upon themselves to go to a meeting in Europe to meet privately with the Foreign Minister of Iran to discuss matters in regards to relations between Iran and the United States.
That seems benign on its face. After all, Sen. Menendez (D-NJ), Sen. Van Hollen (D-DE) and Sen. Murphy (D-CT) currently serve in the “senior” chamber of Congress, the U.S. Senate. And Congress has oversight of the Executive Branch of government, which includes foreign relations.
We introduced our partners to the Logan Act — a law passed by Congress to protect the U.S. from politicians and others who decide on their own to interact with officials of other countries on governmental matters between the U.S. and those countries. Congress felt people in doing so would make a dangerous impact on U.S. foreign policy matters with those countries and could be egregiously damaged by those other than government officials who are expressly authorized to conduct such meetings.
Not only did these three Senators and Kerry make this trip and meet with Iran’s foreign minister without permission of the State Department, but they also did so without the knowledge of anyone in the Administration.
In a FOX News interview, Kerry responded to charges of his violation of the Logan Act by first laughing and then saying, “I haven’t violated any law. I never negotiated with ANYONE.”
The Logan Act never lists “negotiating” as a violation of the law. It states that meeting with those foreign leaders “regarding matters having to do with anything between the U.S. and that other country” is a violation.
When our TNN partners were told of those actions in light of the Logan Act, over 100,000 expressed their anger and dismay! Email after email expressed horror and disgust for Van Hollen, Murphy, Menendez doing so. And there was almost hatred from many for John Kerry’s involvement. He’s not even in the government!
Those emails each very clearly stated that this is happening because there is no fear of prosecution for those crimes. Why is that? Americans feel there is a two-tiered Justice System in the U.S. today: one for regular Americans and one for the political elite that contains separate rules, regulations, and laws that apply only to those elites. And, obviously, those elites are held to a much easier and forgiving justice than are we.
Equal Justice Under the Law: Really!
The U.S. is comprised mostly of lawful, red-blooded Americans who love the red, white, and blue, often get choked up singing the “Star Bangled Banner,” and get a tear in their eye when hearing taps played while the caskets of soldiers are taken off a plane returning home after dying for their nation overseas.
Most Americans are proud to be Americans. And most Americans feel blessed to live in the greatest country on the planet. Most Americans feel one of the reasons for this country’s greatness is the structure of and fairness in the American Justice System. It guarantees us all “Equal Justice under the Law.” Laws are laws, and lawbreakers are considered innocent unless and until they are adjudicated to be guilty by a jury of their peers in a courtroom.
Those are the characteristics of our country that, for a couple of centuries, we just assumed are in place and always will be to protect us all. But that assurance is wavering.
Many Americans see things play out that dispute that eternal guarantee of equal justice. What fuels those disputes is illustrated best by what many have concluded is corruption in our government. Nowhere else is that corruption better represented than a justice system that appears to no longer be a system of justice that is fair and equal for all.
Two sets of rules under the law are called “duplicity:” contradictory doubleness of thought, speech, or action. Federal laws are written and presented to be implemented equally for everyone. Their enforcement sadly is no longer equal.
♦♦ In 2018, Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz issued a criminal referral to the U.S. Attorney’s Office in D.C. related to fired FBI Deputy DirectorAndrew McCabe.
Horowitz issued a scathing report of McCabe’s conduct at the FBI, alleging that he authorized a leak to the media to “advance his personal interests” and then misled internal investigators and fired FBI Director James Comey about the matter.
Lying to federal investigators is a federal crime, and the report was seen by some analysts as a roadmap for federal charges against McCabe. Surely McCabe would be prosecuted. However, in February of 2020, almost two years later, the Department of Justice gave notice they will NOT prosecute McCabe for the criminal wrongdoing revealed in Inspector Horowitz’s referral.
♦♦ Former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn was charged with lying to FBI agents on January 24, 2017. The substance of Flynn’s statements made to FBI agents: he denied asking a Russian Ambassador to come to the United States and denied asking that Ambassador to request Russia to delay making their vote in the U.N. Security Council on a specific issue. Flynn plead guilty on both charges as part of a plea deal. However, Flynn’s lawyer has stated Flynn is asking to withdraw his guilty plea. The resolution is pending.
♦♦ Trump Associate Roger Stone was charged with seven counts. The seven counts against Stone include one count of obstruction of an official proceeding, five counts of false statements — including lying to Congress — and one count of witness tampering in special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into possible collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign during the 2016 presidential election. Stone was sentenced to 34 months in jail. A decision on a possible new trial is pending.
♦♦ George Papadopoulos, a Trump campaign adviser, was charged and subsequently plead guilty to lying to the FBI as part of the Mueller investigation into Trump campaign wrongdoing. Papadopoulos plead guilty and served six weeks in jail.
There were others who were charged, several of which have plead to charges against them. However, none but those above were charged with anything that involved Donald Trump or his campaign. Paul Manaforte and his associate Rick Gates were charged and convicted for a host of actions taken before the Trump Campaign even began and involved nothing to do with the election or Mr. Trump.
Americans expect those — ALL those — who break the laws of the U.S. should face prosecution for their illegal actions. (That includes those who enter the nation illegally as illegal immigrants.) Those same Americans are aghast that any of those who break laws are allowed to skate with no accountability and are never charged for their crimes.
The reality of a “Deep State” with extremely intrusive political power is confirmed over and over as many politically connected Americans actually commit illegal actions for which they are never prosecuted. Each is an example of a two-tiered justice system: one that’s good for politically connected people and a second-tier applicable only for the rest of Americans — those who are NOT connected to VIP’s.
The actions of the Robert Mueller team proved that system exists. Recent actions confirm its existence but confirm that this “New” justice system is deeper and far wider than was first thought.
DOJ “Anti-Trump” Operatives Who Colluded to “Dump Trump”
Who will ever forget these:
Former FBI Director James Comey
DNI Director James Clapper
CIA Director John Brennan
Bruce and Nelli Ohr
The Impeachment Whistleblower
Each of these worked in the Department of Justice, FBI, the White House or were involved directly with the Clinton Campaign during the 2016 election cycle regarding how to make certain Donald Trump did NOT win. Each of these have been implicated with “reasonable” evidence of illegal activity far more serious than was the basis used to take-down Michael Flynn, Roger Stone, and George Papadopoulos. Don’t forget: Inspector General Horowitz in his criminal referral to the DOJ of Andrew McCabe included a significant basis for McCabe’s prosecution.
The anger from Americans for all of the above is headed toward all-out rage. This comes exclusively because there is no explanation offered by the DOJ or any other agency for none of these — NONE — being prosecuted when their crimes are front-and-center in the faces of all Americans!
We’ve tried to be generous to the government regarding no legal actions being taken against those committing these unforgivable acts that often have been illegal. We’ve searched for plausible explanations for the prosecutorial inactions. But, honestly, we keep coming up empty. There’s no believable reason we can find for the lack of equal justice for these wrongdoers as compared to Flynn, Papadopoulos, Stone and even several others.
What’s believable? The only explanation I can find is this:
If you’re a working-class American with no political ties but just do your best in your town or city to raise a family, you’re NOT eligible to receive the same justice as are POLITICOS.
If you’re a federal politician with close ties to career workers at the DOJ, FBI, and intelligence agencies, there’s a good chance you can find a way to obtain a free pass that will exclude you from that “other” justice.
When the dirt began to be released about career bureaucrats who joined together to keep Donald Trump from office and then to remove him, Americans were told by political leaders, “Most of the rank and file workers at the Department of Justice and the FBI are good people who love the Country and authentic justice. The few whose political hatred and animus we’ve seen uncovered are in the minority, and there’s only a handful of them.”
Americans no longer believe that.
I still have the conviction that the DOJ is probably in the midst of ongoing investigations into these and others. We know those have been and are still underway at the hands of Federal Prosecutor John Durham of Connecticut. And Durham announced when they turned from “inquiries” to “criminal investigations.”
Americans don’t have much confidence that anything will come of this. So far, not one of the “black hat” guys has been brought to justice. McCabe is an example of that. Hillary, Comey, Obama, and a host of former Obama Administration members still hold their breaths, praying they’ll too get a pass as did McCabe. The “white hat” guys have all either been busted, run out of town or the country, or are hiding hoping to not show up in someone’s bullseye.
Is that the America in which we want to live? Do we not want and expect everyone to receive justice based on the same criteria as that for those in government and politics? Americans simply want “Equal Justice under the Law“– no special favors, no tricks by law enforcement officers, and simple truth.
We learned long ago that among the American public, “perception is reality.” Today’s American perception of the Justice System is that it has branched into two branches. Until that is disproven through actual examples that are rolled out in the public consistently, distrust for fairness under our justice system exists and will sadly continue to grow.
Americans are not supposed to feel that way. If your name is Kerry, Comey, Clinton, McCabe, Smith or Jones, Lady Justice shown above promised us all she’d be blind.
Today we are looking directly into the face of government anarchy and the hypocrisy by the Left in the U.S. that we’ve always known but have never before seen it so blatantly thrown into the faces of the American public. Three U.S. Senators and a former Secretary of State have purposely and secretly been meeting with the Foreign Minister of the country named by the U.S. as the leading promoter of terrorism on Earth: Iran.
I thought our government is at odds with Iran. Isn’t Iran the #1 funder of terrorist activities all around the world? Are not the streets of Tehran filled with Iranians most weekends demonstrating against the U.S., stomping on and burning our flag while yelling, “Death to Americans?” Why would our government secretly send a group of U.S. Senators to negotiate with Iran’s foreign minister?
The answer: Our government DIDN’T send them! They went on their own with no conversations with our State Department or coordination with anyone else in the Trump Administration.
Those senators led by Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut secretly met Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif in Germany during the Munich Security Conference over the weekend, according to U.S.-based news outlet The Federalist. According to senior editor Mollie Hemingway, whose tweets are occasionally retweeted by PresidentTrump, the report cited a high-level source briefed by a French delegation to the event.
“Chris Murphy and other Democratic Senators held a secret meeting with Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif last week, a high-level source reports. His office is not responding to repeated requests for comment,” tweeted Hemingway.
In her report, she said, “A State Department official who spoke on background said that the State Department was not aware of any side meetings with Iranian officials in which Murphy was engaged. Such a meeting would mean Murphy had done the type of secret coordination with foreign leaders to potentially undermine the U.S. government that he accused Trump officials of doing as they prepared for Trump’s administration,” Hemingway said.
Senators Robert Menendez of New Jersey and Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, as well as former Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, also attended the event.
During the event on Saturday, both Murphy and Zarif publicly discussed and grilled U.S. policies on the Middle East at a two-hour-session.
The 56th Munich Security Conference took place on February 14-16. For three days, the conference was at the center of international diplomacy and welcomed world leaders from politics, academia, and civil society.
More about those Senators in a bit…
Former Secretary of State John Kerry admitted that he’s met with top Iranian officials in hopes of salvaging the scrapped nuclear deal — as he slammed the Trump administration for trying to further “isolate” Iran.
The one-time presidential candidate said he’s sat down with Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif “three or four times” in places including Norway and Munich since leaving office.
“What I have done is tried to elicit from him what Iran might be willing to do in order to change the dynamic in the Middle East for the better,” Kerry explained in an interview with radio host Hugh Hewitt. “What do you do to try to get peace in Syria? I mean, those are the things that really are preoccupying, because those are the impediments to people, to Iran’s ability to convince people that it’s ready to embrace something different.”
Constitutional experts have argued for decades about who in the U.S. government has power over foreign policy. Regarding “normal” policy matters, the President has always handled such matters. But when differences result in matters of military actions, Congress has the sole power from the War Powers Act to declare war.
Past Presidents have skirted the War Powers Act when they initiated American military intervention in foreign countries. Obama went to Libya with no Congressional approval. Just as a note: that action in Libya resulted in the deaths of four Americans at the Benghazi consulate. Obama took solo actions regarding Syria and ISIS. Bush 43 in ,the shadow of the New York twin-towers rubble, went to Congress for permission to take-on Saadam Hussein in Iraq.
Those are not “normal” foreign policy matters. But they certainly are about foreign policy. All-out war definitely falls under the direction of Congress.
There have been historical interventions into foreign policy matters by others than the current President. Doing so is very dangerous, especially in light of the tenuous relationships that currently and for many years have existed between the U.S. and North Korea, Syria, Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Iran. One would think all those in government would be careful about any and all actions either Congress or the Administration take directly with those countries and surely would alert the other Branch in advance of such actions.
Few realize there is a U.S. federal law that prohibits such actions by those unauthorized to do so from happening: The Logan Act.
The Logan Act
The Logan Act has remained almost unchanged and unused since its passage. The act is short and reads as follows:
Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.
The language of the act appears to encompass almost every communication between a U.S. citizen and a foreign government considered an attempt to influence negotiations between their two countries. Because the language is so broad in scope, legal scholars and judges have suggested that the Logan Act is unconstitutional. Historically, the act has been used more as a threat to those engaged in various political activities than as a weapon for prosecution. In fact, Logan Act violations have been discussed in almost every administration without any serious attempt at enforcement, and to date, there have been no convictions and only one recorded indictment.
One example of the act’s use as a threat of prosecution involved the Reverend Jesse Jackson. In 1984, Jackson took well-publicized trips to Cuba and Nicaragua and returned with several Cuban political prisoners seeking asylum in the United States. President Ronald Reagan stated that Jackson’s activities may have violated the law, but Jackson was not pursued beyond a threat.
The only Logan Act indictment occurred in 1803. It involved a Kentucky newspaper article that argued for the formation in the western United States of a separate nation allied to France. No prosecution followed.
Do you see any potential conflict with this law that seems to have stepped cross the line?
Senators Chris Murphy, Robert Menendez, and Chris Van Hollen certainly are concerned about U.S. relations with the nation of Iran. They were each in full support of President Obama’s Nuclear Agreement with Iran to prevent Iran from, voluntarily, further pursuing nuclear weapons. But that’s not the job of a small group of American Senators.
I have huge problems with what these three Senators and John Kerry did on their own, and Kerry multiple times.
How does the U.S. historically acts to set foreign policy with countries when negotiations become serious and require formal U.S. action. We use treaties. We negotiate treaties to accomplish two things: make certain leaders in both countries are clear on the obligations of each, and to set by agreement the terms and conditions for compliance that includes actions that WILL result from any violation of the treaty.
Barack Obama was adamantly in support of Iran. He worked on that Nuclear Agreement for a long time. If it was meant to be a permanent agreement, then why did Obama not bring the agreement to the Senate to be ratified as an official treaty? I have my thoughts, but my thoughts are opinion. In this case, all that matters is that there is no treaty with Iran. If there was so much concern by those Obama Democrats about permanently preventing nuclear development by Iran, why did the Obama Administration not seek a permanent fix: a treaty?
It’s important to note that the U.S. entered the Nuclear Agreement solely by the executive action of President Obama. Congress was not part of the process. That apparently was OK with those Senators and other Democrats. But the mysterious and secret details negotiated by Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry included $150 Billion dollars released to Iran. That decision was made without Congress even knowing about it. And the last $400 million was sent to Tehran on a U.S. private jet — IN CASH!
That smelled to Americans. The stench of that transaction and the subsequent discovery that the Nuclear Iran deal that was supposed to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons only slowed them down for a few years. It never was agreed that they would forever cease their nuclear military programs.
On another note regarding these Senators meeting with Iranians, Sen. Murphy is heavily involved with the lobbying group, the National Iranian American Council, a group that has ties directly to the Islamic Republic of Iran. Republican Senators Braun, Cotton, and Cruz have requested that the Department of Justice investigate the group for violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act.
The Braun, Cotton, and Cruz Senators wrote to Murphy, Van Hollen and Menendez about their meetings with Iranians calling those meetings “interactions that purport to improve understanding between American and Iranian people but in reality, seem to spread propaganda and lobby on behalf of the Iranian government.”
There is also evidence to support that Zarif founded the group himself.
I am going to cut right to the chase: it is my opinion based on my understanding from the plain language of the Logan Act that former Secretary of State John Kerry, Senators Chris Murphy, Chris Van Hollen, and Robert Menendez have committed felony acts by breaking the terms of the Logan Act:
“Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
We Americans are NOT stupid — we can read. There is no doubt in my mind that Kerry and the Senators met in Iran with intent to influence the conduct of members of the Iran government. And they had NO authorizations to take such actions.
And Kerry has met by himself previously wit,h Zarif to apologize for President Trump. Kerry even told Zarif that (paraphrased), “He won’t be in office for too long. We’ll get this all straight and the Agreement put back in place with the next election.”
What Kerry and these Senators have done is exactly what numerous previous Americans have been convicted of, several of which are in prison today. For any American to legally be in meetings and discussions with leaders of foreign agents, they must be registered with the U.S. State Department before conducting any meetings. These four politicians did NOT register as agents. They should pay the same price for their wrongdoing as have so many other Americans.
I have always held respect for the offices held by those in government over me. In this case, I think all these Senators and Kerry by doing what they’ve done are not just guilty of that one felony offense, I feel their actions arguably are acts of treason.
Some will say, “The Constitution does not preclude Senators from taking such actions, so their doing so is not illegal.”
That’s exactly why CONGRESS passed the Logan Act! Their meeting with Zarif is criminal.
Congress — who holds the exclusive power to craft and pass laws in the U.S. — passed The Logan Act telling everyone not to collude with foreign governments about matters between the U.S. and those other countries. It seems that doing so did not just get started. Apparently one of these and two OTHER U.S. Senators also stuck their noses into Ukrainian matters back in 2018. A letter was delivered to Ukraine from Washington by Sens. Robert Menendez of New Jersey, Richard Durbin of Illinois and Patrick Leahy of Vermont, expressly asking a Ukraine prosecutor if he were fully cooperating with then-special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into alleged “collusion” between Russia and the Trump 2016 campaign.
Once again, we ask: “Where is the Department of Justice on this matter? Where is the FBI?”
Or is it simply that current and past members of Congress are immune to the laws THEY pass? Are they better than other Americans?
What they did is NO different than any American — ANY American — approaching a foreign government to discuss specifics of the political relationship between that country and the U.S.
Americans are tired of having to point to the obvious evidence of their being a “two-tiered” system of Justice in the United States: one that applies to members of the federal government and their minions and one that applies to everyone else.
Never before in my lifetime have I watched as so many unexplainable things happen in Washington. It has been uncanny in the last few years to watch the “other shoe” drop on people and circumstances time after time. “Unexplainable” is the applicable word for use in this discussion today.
Washington and politics go hand-in-hand. That alone initiates some things that Americans will never understand. Many of those never get explained — some for purposes of security, and some because someone does not want the public to know accompanying details. But since Donald Trump’s 2016 election, it seems there has been a flood of these mysterious events that occur at the most peculiar times.
“Impeach 45!” Even before the 2016 election, Democrats were already discussing impeaching Donald Trump. The “all-in” Mainstream Media reported about the cries for impeachment but never mentioned how crazy those cries were. Minutes after Trump’s oath of office, several national newspapers released stories discussing his “impending impeachment.”
The Mueller Investigation. Almost the entire Mueller Investigation was rife with strange and unusual elements. Its basis was bogus from the beginning: the investigation of alleged collusion between Russia and the Trump Campaign. Mueller used a team of 30 investigative attorneys that were almost entirely registered Democrats who had supported Hillary Clinton and other Democrat candidates in 2016. Thirty-months and $40 million later, no one was implicated by the Mueller team with any type of connection with the Russians.
A year or so into the Mueller probe, it quietly morphed into an investigation into President Trump’s obstruction of justice. Democrats in the House and Senate were frozen for the entire time, accomplishing little if anything in federal legislation.
To wrap up the probe, Mueller himself faced lawmakers to answer questions about the investigation. Mueller came away as little more than an “empty suit:” no proof of nor even a whiff of intent on the part of anyone that was part of the Trump campaign — or anyone else — to use Ukraine or Russia as a piggy bank or any other way. The Mueller Probe was a bomb.
Sealed Indictments. Not long after former Attorney General Jeff Sessions authorized (in a letter made public) federal prosecutor John Huber Utah to launch a broad investigation into “wrongdoing in the 2016 presidential campaign,” tens of thousands of sealed indictments began to show up in the public registries of eventually every federal court in the U.S. That they have each been sealed means that the public has no way of knowing who the indictments name, the charges against those charged, or any other details. For the purpose of comparison, prior to these indictments being implemented, the most such citations being issued in any year totaled 2300. From November 2017 through October of 2018, 60,000 had been released. It’s 2020, and we still do not know the nature of any of those indictments that are yet to be unsealed.
2019-2020 Impeachment. Those year dates are inserted in the heading because it looks like we may have to differentiate Trump’s impeachment by the years the impeachments were conducted! We’ve had one so far. The way it looks, Democrats have left the door open for another impeachment inquiry before the 2020 November election. They have even stated if he wins the election, investigations into his wrongdoing will continue. We’ve covered for you ad nauseum the entire first impeachment circus. So we don’t need to share those details today. We’ll almost certainly be back with “Trump Impeachment #2.”
Turnovers.In Trump’s first 30 months in office, it seemed he was constantly replacing senior members of his campaign team and those part of his cabinet and other areas in his administration. It often seemed there was no rhyme or reason to some of those replacement decisions. Of course, the Media made each one the “beginning of the end” for President Trump. More of those changes came at the hands of those leaving which immediately fueled the Media to jump on President Trump.
“Media Mania.”Never before in my lifetime has the American media been so obviously in the corner of a presidential candidate as in 2016. From even before Trump announced his run, the Media had Hillary Clinton already moving into the White House. Throughout the campaign and the election, their reporting in support of HRC was non-stop.
Never before in my lifetime has the American media been so obviously negative about a presidential candidate as in 2016. Someone looking in from somewhere else on Earth would have thought Donald Trump was a convicted baby-killer who was trafficking young children.
With the Mueller Investigation, Ukraine-Gate, and the subsequent impeachment of President Trump, at least 90% of Mainstream Media’s reporting was about Donald Trump and whatever was the “Trump scandal of the day.” The Senate acquitted Mr. Trump. But one would think the trial was still in full swing.
The Department of Justice.First, there was Attorney General Jeff Sessions that the media LOVED because he was feckless at best. Remember: he really put the President in a box by his personal recusal from the investigation of the Trump Campaign for Russian collusion. And he gave the President NO warning about recusal as a possibility before he was appointed AG. The President continuously blasted Sessions on Twitter.
It seemed for two years there was at least one tidbit of wrongdoing a day by the Obama DOJ in the news: wrongdoing by both Obama AG’s, former FBI Director James Comey, FBI agents, DOJ officials and even assistant FBI Directors.
After Sessions, Mr. Trump appointed William Barr as Attorney General. He too has been an everyday target for the Left. Nothing he does is correct and each of the things he does — regardless of circumstances for his doing so — is worthy of demands from Democrats for his resignation. But Mr. Barr is heavily involved in the latest DOJ “scandal.”
President Trump’s main source of information dissemination is through his Twitter account. POTUS is remarkably proficient at using it. February 10 the sentencing recommendation from DOJ prosecutors of convicted Trump confidant Roger Stone was made public. It was extremely harsh for the crimes he committed. President Trump went to Twitter and blasted the DOJ for the excessive sentence. Almost simultaneously it was released that Mr. Barr had instructed his underlings to consider revision of the sentence. The Media started screaming claims of coordination between the White House and the DOJ while numerous Democrats began crying for Mr. Barr’s head.
The AG immediately went to the media to explain:
In an exclusive interview, Attorney General Bill Barr told ABC News on Thursday that President Donald Trump “has never asked me to do anything in a criminal case” but should stop tweeting about the Justice Department because his tweets “make it impossible for me to do my job.”
Barr’s comments are a rare break with a president who the attorney general has aligned himself with and fiercely defended. But it also puts Barr in line with many of Trump’s supporters on Capitol Hill who say they support the president but wish he’d cut back on his tweets.
“Barr Must Resign.” More than 1,100 former officials of the U.S. Department of Justice (both Democrats and Republicans) have so far signed a letter demanding Attorney General William Barr resign his post because he represents “a grave threat to the administration of justice” in the United States. The open letter accuses Barr of “doing the President’s personal bidding” and in so doing, damaging the “Department of Justice’s reputation for integrity and the rule of law.” Barr has long been accused of seeing his job as defending Trump as a personal lawyer instead of impartially representing the government in all legal matters and is beyond politics. The “fuse” that resulted in the letter: Barr’s alleged abuse of power decision to reduce the amount of prison time a team of four DOJ prosecutors planned to seek for Trump friend Roger Stone, who was found guilty of seven criminal counts. Barr’s decision prompted the four DOJ lawyers who prosecuted Stone to quit the case.
“It is unheard of for the Department’s top leaders to overrule line prosecutors, who are following established policies, in order to give preferential treatment to a close associate of the President, as Attorney General Barr did in the Stone case,” said the letter. “Those actions, and the damage they have done to the Department of Justice’s reputation for integrity and the rule of law, require Mr. Barr to resign.” The letter also said, “because we have little expectation (that Barr will resign), it falls to the Department’s career officials to take appropriate action to uphold their oaths of office and defend nonpartisan, apolitical justice.” It also said the DOJ’s legal decisions “must be impartial and insulated from political influence.”
There are too many of these odd occurrences involving the Donald Trump presidency for this to just be “an accident” or “part of the political process.” It appears much if not all of these are coordinated and are for some specific desired result. What could that be?
I am unsure if anyone can answer that question accurately. And if there is someone who can, I doubt we’ll ever hear that answer. Why? Because if there IS a cause for all this rancor, it could only be part of some type of offense to remove not only Donald Trump from the White House but dismantle the “new” Department of Justice lead by Attorney General William Ball.
Would you like to speculate for a moment to examine what might be some of the reasons for these? Let’s do that:
There is a strong feeling by some Americans that Donald Trump is evil, has aspirations for sole power over our nation, and has ambitions to be the head of its government for longer than Constitutionally allowed;
There’s a deep-seated hatred among Democrats for President Trump because he interfered with the Liberal cause of moving the U.S. into Socialism by beating Hillary Clinton. She was their “anointed one” who was destined to continue that move away from Capitalism to Socialism.
“The World hates Donald Trump and, as a result, no longer looks up to the United States.” I know there are those who feel that way. But I find it difficult to accept that that alone would be sufficient purpose for the many and varied attacks on the President and others in his administration.
They disagree with his policies. Remember: through executive orders, he dismantled a huge amount of caustic regulations that stifled not only corporate growth but forced millions into unemployment lines. Trump’s tax cuts devastated the ambitions of the far left to drive the economics of the U.S. even further down the road of bigger government. That always interprets into massive social program expense increases in several ways: adding to existing programs, adding new programs, and by putting those unemployed folks back in the ranks of the unemployed drives welfare and other government assistance programs through the roof. That interprets directly into “government control” — the panacea of the Left.
It’s plausible to me that some of these may contribute to all of the hateful uncertainly that has been purposely initiated by the Democrat Party since Donald Trump’s November 2016 victory. But there are too many that are so obviously timed and coordinated just to be happening in innocence. If they are not all coordinated, I’ll eat a Nike tennis shoe!
Here are my two cents: those on the Left are desperate to hide eight-years of wrongdoing — much of which was illegal.
That would explain all the sealed indictments. That would explain the Jeff Sessions authorizing in a letter released to the public of federal prosecutor Jim Huber of Utah to investigate all the wrongdoing during the 2016 election campaign. It would also explain their tremendous displeasure with Attorney General Barr authorizing Connecticut federal prosecutor John Durham to conduct an investigation into FBI wrongdoing (and ancillary matters that result from that original investigation). Durham’s first was “an investigation.” He then released to the public that it had turned into a “criminal investigation.” Durham has used so far at least one grand jury and probably one more.
There’s one big giveaway that leads me to these conclusions: Attorney General Barr did NOTHING unethical or wrong in instructing his department to revisit the sentencing recommendation of a convicted person to confirm the “penalty fits the crime.” That is common in almost EVERY federal criminal case. Secondly, those Mueller hold-over prosecutors were anti-Trump bureaucratic DOJ lawyers with an ax to grind. They spent $40 million U.S. tax dollars and almost three years in the worst FBI/DOJ investigation of my life that achieved virtually NO substantive results. They did not find one person guilty of anything that could have been considered “collusion with the Russians in the 2016 election.”
The bottom line is this: it is my opinion that some or many of those 1100 “former” officials of the DOJ who signed that letter asking for AG Barr to resign were in former Administrations. I am sure some of those may have a name on one of those many sealed indictments. Some may be implicated in Durham’s investigation. Just consider this: one does not have to be an attorney to understand that an Attorney General not only has the authority to ask his staff to find a revision of a harsh sentence to a person convicted of a non-violent crime, but it is also done all the time. It was done numerous times in the Obama Administration.
The “Old Guard” in Washington is afraid. They have been scratching the dirt frantically searching for some way to stop Donald Trump. Their desperation is at a fever pitch because the DOJ is getting close. With Barr and Trump gone, their mischief can remain buried!
That’s Washington, folks. That’s how the Deep State operates today and for the last 50 years: they protect their own.
I missed Part 3 of my impeachment forecast. Part 1 was immediately following Mr. Trump’s inauguration when I predicted he would be impeached before the 2020 election. Part 2 was that the House would impeach him but the Senate would acquit him: two-for-two. Part 3 was the resignation of Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House. That has not happened…YET. Two-for-three is not a bad day betting on horses!
There are too many smart people looking in on all this. There’s something being hidden; someone’s desperate to keep the covers from being pulled back.
By the way: where have John Brennan, James Comey, Susan Rice, Eric Holder, James Clapper, and others of that clan been hiding lately? Do you think there may be massive amounts of antacid being consumed there?