Archive for the ‘Justice Department’ Category

NEW IMPEACHMENT RULES WOULD SNARE OBAMA BY VICTOR DAVIS HANSON

Tuesday, March 3rd, 2020

 

Thanks to Victor Davis Hanson for reminding us of all the  illegal  and corrupt actions taken by Obama during his presidency.   Just makes your blood boil that he got away with it all !  Would love to see him do a similar article on Hillary. He certainly would have plenty of material to work with !!!    Nancy  

Do not insult our collective intelligence by suggesting that Donald J. Trump abused the Constitution and the office of president in a way that would have been unthinkable to Barack Obama.

Obama was not impeached not because he did not do things that Donald Trump did, but because his opposition in the House did not do what Democrats later most willingly did: attempt a coup to remove a president without cause

By Victor Davis Hanson    March 1, 2020

New Impeachment Rules Would Snare Obama

amgreatness.com/2020/03/01/new-impeachment-rules-would-snare-obama/

March 2, 2020

Barack Obama’s eight-year tenure was detrimental to the United States, but like most of his nonbelievers, I harbor no animosity for his person.

Few critics that I know advocated that Obama be impeached, much less removed from office, before his reelection bid—even amid his worst scandals and dangerous policies. But we are now in a new age, whose protocols might have made it impossible for the Obama Administration to have finished two terms. 

Remember, his administration ran some 2,000 guns to Mexican cartels in some hare-brained scheme to monitor violence spilling into the United States. Under the new customs, he should have been impeached for instructing Attorney General Eric Holder to refuse to testify to Congress about Fast and Furious, or at least for not handing over subpoenaed documents. Imagine a Trump gun-walking scheme in Mexico.

It was bad enough that Holder was the first attorney general to be held in contempt of Congress, well aside from the embarrassment of his unhinged outbursts about “my people” (hinthis “my” did not mean Americans of all races and creeds). We all remember Holder’s lunatic dismissals of his own country as “a nation of cowards.” (Imagine Bill Barr referring to “my people” or calling Americans cowards)

Fine—politicians and bureaucrats misspeak. It is no surprise that radical progressives like Holder are both partisans and tribalists or that they don’t always have positive thoughts about America, past or present. But Obama won the election. So voters had ample warning from his past that he would likely put as many leftists as he wished into government. He had the legal right and political rationale to do so, without his opponents inventing crimes to remove them. 

At least he did before the Trump hysteria.

Criminalizing Politics

(more…)

Share

REVOLUTION: TRUMP, WASHINGTON AND ‘WE THE PEOPLE’ – NEW BOOK BY KT MCFARLAND

Friday, February 28th, 2020

 

This video is a disturbing and disgusting account of how KT McFarland was treated by FBI agents during the Mueller probe.   See the  book review below of KT’s newly released book ‘Revolution: Trump, Washington, and “We the People” that describes the Washington  Establishment’s attempt to destroy President Trump .   Nancy
VIDEO – KT MCFARLAND ON FOX BUSINESS WITH  Stuart Varney

 had to prove I was innocent in the Mueller probe: KT McFarland

Former Trump deputy national security adviser KT McFarland discusses her new book which details her treatment by FBI agents taking part in the Mueller probe.

Revolution: Trump, Washington and “We the People” Hardcover – February 25, 2020    by KT McFarland

When Trump’s first Deputy National Security Advisor left Washington, she disappeared from sight. Now former government official and political commentator KT McFarland returns with tenacity, resolve, and the truth about the Trump Administration and those seeking to destroy it.

For decades, KT McFarland has been one of the country’s most prominent conservative foreign policy experts. She was part of the Trump Revolution from the beginning. As Trump’s first Deputy National Security Advisor, she had a seat at the table for everything: Trump’s unconventional campaign and upset victory; his throw-out-the-rule-book Trump Tower Transition; the chaotic first months in the West Wing; the unusual events surrounding General Flynn’s firing; and the sprawling Mueller investigation. 

Share

VIDEO – SECRET ON THE TARMAC – NEW BOOK

Wednesday, February 19th, 2020

 

VIDEO  New Book – Secret On The Tarmac – FOX NEWS INTERVIEW

www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GUB8ALTpH0

New details emerge from Clinton-Lynch clandestine tarmac meeting

1,241,370 views
Feb 17, 2020

Share

VIDEO – PARDON ROGER STONE

Friday, February 14th, 2020

Share

VIDEO – THE RADICAL NEW WAY FORWARD ACT

Tuesday, February 11th, 2020
This  bill now in Congress is sponsored by 44 Democrats and  would destroy the rule of law in our country regarding illegal immigration. Please share with your contacts as we need to make sure it never passes and  becomes law.   Nancy
VIDEO  TUCKER CARLSON – THE NEW WAY FORWARD ACT
YouTube
 · 640,000+ views
 · 2/8/2020
 · by
Fox News

 

Share

VIDEO HOW COMMUNIST IDEOLOGY INFILTRATED AMERICA’S SECURITY AGENCIES AND FUELED SPYGATE – DIANA WEST

Monday, January 27th, 2020

 

The information provided by Diana West, author of ‘American Betrayal’ and now ‘The Red Thread’,   in this video  explains so much of what has been happening in our country in the attempt to discredit and impeach President Trump.  Frightening !  Nancy

How Communist Ideology Infiltrated America’s Security Agencies & Fueled Spygate—Diana West

Why does Diana West believe that communist ideology has infiltrated America’s intelligence agencies? After looking into key figures involved in the Spygate scandal, what information did Diana West uncover about their ideological beliefs? How is Donald Trump a “counter-revolutionary” president, in West’s view? This is American Thought Leaders 🇺🇸, and I’m Jan Jekielek. In this episode, we’ll sit down with Diana West, a journalist and author of “The Red Thread: A Search for Ideological Drivers Inside the Anti-Trump Conspiracy.”
 
67,445 views
Premiered Jan 13, 2020
 
 

Share

FISA COURT CONFIRMS TWO CARTER PAGE SURVEILLANCE APPLICATIONS ‘ NOT VALID’

Thursday, January 23rd, 2020

 

FISA Court Confirms Two Carter Page Surveillance Applications ‘Not Valid’

A FISA Court order declassified Thursday confirmed that the government had found two of the four FISA applications authorized for the FBI to surveil 2016 Trump-campaign adviser Carter Page to be “not valid,” and will further investigate the validity of the other two.

The order revealed that the government found two of the surveillance application renewals to be “not valid” based on “the material misstatements and omission” used by the FBI, which was found by the Justice Department to have “insufficient predication to establish probable cause to believe that Page was acting as an agent of a foreign power.”

Based on the ordering of the applications, it appears the review found the second and third renewal applications used against Page to be invalid, while the original application and the first renewal remain under investigation. The third renewal was personally signed by James Comey, while the fourth was signed by Andrew McCabe.

The court also said it was still waiting on the Bureau after it “agreed ‘to sequester all collection the FBI acquired pursuant to the Court’s authorizations’” against Page, but so far has not provided an update.

(more…)

Share

WOULD DEMOCRATS IMPEACH OBAMA?

Thursday, January 23rd, 2020

This article by Karl Rove lists the numerous times Obama’s  dubious tactics as president  were never criticized by Democrats.  One way to stop the Democrats at the senate trial, is to compare all the questionable tactics that Obama did as president to what they are alleging Trump has done.     Nancy

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Would Democrats Impeach Obama?

His dealings with foreign officials and Congress look as suspect as Trump’s

By Karl Rove    January 23, 2020

Hypocrisy is common in Washington, but impeachment is bringing out more than its fair share. That’s true of some Republicans, and the mainstream media devotes countless hours to it. What gets much less attention is the hypocrisy of the party that to which most journalists are sympathetic: the Democrats.

Take Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. On Tuesday he demanded the Senate call witnesses, claiming they’re required for a “fair trial” and slamming Republican opposition as a “coverup.” But the GOP position is exactly what Mr. Schumer’s was during President Bill Clinton’s impeachment trial in 1999. Back then he said it “doesn’t make sense” for the Senate to call witnesses.

More important than hypocrisy about the process of impeachment is hypocrisy about the substance. Removing a president is the most draconian act Congress can take. It ill serves America if the party opposed to the president uses impeachment as a political weapon to tarnish his standing and weaken him for the next election.

When considering the Democrats’ high-minded arguments, ask yourself: What if Hillary Clinton won in 2016? After she took office, it would have been revealed that her campaign hired the opposition-research firm Fusion GPS, which assigned Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence official, to reach out to Russian counterparts to solicit dirt on Donald Trump. Recall that the since-discredited dossier Mr. Steele peddled to the media in the fall of 2016 was made up of unsubstantiated rumors from former Russian agents.

It’s naive to believe the Kremlin was unaware that Mr. Steele asked Moscow pals for dirt on Mr. Trump. Those spies are retired, but they rely on Vladimir Putin for their pension checks. Who among congressional Democrats would now be calling for Mrs. Clinton’s removal if she were in the Oval Office? I doubt any. I’ve searched in vain for Democratic criticism for her soliciting foreign involvement in the 2016 election—the principal charge of their impeachment case against President Trump.

Furthermore, while Democrats say Mr. Trump should be removed for seeking a quid pro quo—a Ukrainian investigation of Joe and Hunter Biden in return for U.S. military aid—what about President Barack Obama’s March 2012 open-mic moment? At a summit in Seoul, he asked Russian President Dmitry Medvedev to tell his boss, then-Prime Minister Putin, that “on all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space. . . . This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.” In other words, if Mr. Putin didn’t create problems during Mr. Obama’s re-election fight with Mitt Romney, Mr. Obama would show “flexibility” on missile defense and other important issues of national security and foreign policy after the election. Again, crickets when it comes to Democratic criticism.

(more…)

Share

WARREN’S BANANA REPUBLIC

Thursday, January 23rd, 2020

 

This woman is definitely a danger to our liberties.  Nancy
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Warren’s Banana Republic

She promises to investigate Trump officials after she wins.

Editorial Board   January 23, 2020

Think the fog of partisan Trump investigations will lift once the President leaves office, either in 2021 or 2025? Not if Elizabeth Warren has anything to say about it. With the Iowa caucuses approaching and her campaign fortunes flagging, Senator Warren now says that as President she’d launch an open-ended criminal investigation into her predecessor and anyone who worked for him.

Ms. Warren’s latest “anti-corruption” plan says she would create “a Justice Department Task Force to investigate corruption during the Trump administration and to hold government officials accountable for illegal activity.” She would order Justice to look for violations of “federal bribery laws, insider trading laws, and other anti-corruption and public integrity laws” as well as immigration-enforcement offenses.

“This will be no ordinary transition between administrations,” the document says ominously. Team Warren won’t be satisfied with taking control of the executive branch in an election. They also want scalps of choice ex-officials. The plan links to news articles about Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, White House Adviser KellyanneCon way and Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Ben Carson.

If there is evidence of a crime by a former Administration official, it should be investigated through the normal channels. Ms. Warren is proposing something different: A law-enforcement task force dedicated to searching for wrongdoing only by political opponents. This would be familiar in Latin American dictatorships where the party that loses an election may be jailed as retribution.

Pundits said Mr. Trump’s 2016 campaign threat to investigate Hillary Clinton for her email mismanagement was a chilling breach of democratic norms. We opposed such an investigation but at least the alleged misconduct was limited to specific conduct by one official, whereas Ms. Warren wants investigations of all Republican officials for any political offenses.

Despite all the apocalyptic think-pieces and high-minded books, America has not become an “autocracy” three years into Donald Trump’s Presidency. The opposition party won the House in the midterms, proceeded to impeach the President, and its leading candidates are ahead in the head-to-head 2020 presidential election polls.

Yet in polarized times the temptation to criminalize political differences is stronger than ever. It will be especially strong for Democrats once they are back in control of the Justice Department. Down Senator Warren’s road lies a real threat to liberty.

 

Share

ATTORNEY GENERAL BARR COMMENTS ON THE HOROWITZ REPORT

Friday, December 13th, 2019

 

THE EPOCH TIMES

William Barr Has Suddenly Become Chatty—and He’s Provided Quite an Information Dump

Sharyl Attkisson
DCONTRIBUTOR
December 12, 2019
In each of two video appearances, on NBC News and at Wall Street Journal’s “CEO Council,” Attorney General William Barr provided the same basic information and views about the U.S. intelligence community’s actions against the Trump campaign in 2016 and 2017. A criminal investigation is underway and being led by U.S. Attorney John Durham.

Barr was motivated to make the public statements, he said, by the misreporting and confusion surrounding Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s report issued on Dec. 9. It found serious government surveillance abuses but no evidence of political bias on the part of the offending FBI officials and agents.

Below are 24 points Barr felt the need to make after the release of the Horowitz report. (All of the information is attributed to Barr.)

1. Don’t expect Durham’s findings to be announced before late spring or summer 2020.
2. The FBI did spy on the Trump campaign. That’s what electronic surveillance is.

3. Regarding the FBI’s actions in surveilling Trump campaign associates, it was a “travesty” and there were “many abuses.”

4. From “day one,” the FBI investigation generated exculpatory information (tending to point to the targets’ innocence) and nothing that corroborated Russia collusion.

5. It’s a “big deal” to use U.S. law enforcement and intelligence resources to investigate the opposing political party, and I cannot think of another recent instance in which this happened.

6. Evidence to start the FBI’s investigation into Trump associates was “flimsy” from the start and based on the idea that Trump aide George Papadopoulos expressed he may have had pre-knowledge of a Democrat National Committee computer hack. However, it was actually just an offhand barroom comment by a young campaign aide described merely as a “suggestion of a suggestion, a vague allusion” to the fact that the Russians may have something they can dump. But by that time, May 2016, there was already rampant speculation online and in political circles that the Russians had hacked Hillary Clinton’s emails in 2014 and that they might surface. So the idea that Papadopoulos’s comment showed pre-knowledge of the Democratic National Committee hack and dump “is a big stretch.” 

7. It was “wrong” for the FBI to presume the Trump campaign was part of a plot. They should have gone to the campaign and discussed their suspicions.
Share
Search All Posts
Categories