Though early in the Judiciary hearings, I think it’s becoming obvious that what we are getting with Bill Barr is “Christopher Wray” squared.
Rush has suggested that maybe Barr is only attempting to respond to questions with answers that will put Democrats at ease: “I won’t fire Mueller”, “Mueller would never conduct a ‘witch hunt…”, “Mueller is a wonderful man, and a good friend”, “I’ll release the Special Counsel’s investigative report…”, and more blah, blahs.
Not sure how Rush feels about Barr as a true ‘standup guy’, or a deep ‘Deep Stater”, but I know what I believe (G H W Bush named him AG in his administration, after all).
I’ve not heard all the questions posed by the Judiciary’s senators, but I would like to hear more from the GOP side along the lines of,:
“Would you ever meet secretly with the spouse of a target of an FBI investigation, on there eve of the bureau’s finalizing its conclusions?”
“Would you fire a subordinate found to be in “Contempt of Congress?”
And so on.
I believe that Mr. Barr will be coming out of “door 3” and I believe the tipoff to that prediction is when Mr. Barr is confirmed by a vote in the full senate which includes at least 25 Democrat votes (including, of course, Joe Manchin) . DLH
WILLIAM BARR, TRUMP’S AG NOMINEE, FACES THE “ALL-STAR SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE” TUESDAY
Di-Fi (She’s probably already gotten an anonymous tip that Barr’s a ‘predator’, months ago), and
Chris (Don’tcha wish Delaware had elected a ‘witch?) Coons, of the Coons/Flake vaudeville act at the last SCOTUS hearings.
But what will we get, when it’s over? 1. a Gorsuch, 2. a Kavanaugh, or 3. a Christopher Wray?
With 1. we get a likely ‘center-right’ person who performs his Constitutional duties, reflecting the will of the electorate in 2016 and his own views on Constitutional originalism.
With 2. we get a prospective ‘center-right’ individual, who, apparently (to us), was intimidated and diminished by his confirmation experience. We fear, based on the limited examples so far, that he may be likely to stray from his Constitutionalist impulses, perhaps in order to occasionally, or often, demonstrate to those Judiciary Democrats that he is not the ‘evil incarnate’ as he was portrayed.
With 3. we get as pure an “establishment” figure as possible in a Trump nominee. Probably not a “Deep Stater” but certainly one who seems to have been compromised early on to support, if not advance its agenda.
And how will we know which door Mr. Barr will come out of?
Assuming he ultimately is confirmed, having barely survived the usual malevolent behavior of Judiciary Democrats and the tightest possible Senate vote, we may have in Mr. Barr an Attorney General who will act in the interests of the American people and according to the values and Constitutional requirements of the nation.
If, as expected, the Judiciary Committee experience is as brutalizing and partisan as recently seen, but Mr. Barr survives it and a razor thin Senate confirmation vote, we will have to wait, and hope that he will follow the instincts for the proper direction of his office, as we believe him to have.
If, however, this nominee is treated by Judiciary Democrats roughly and with pettiness, but without the extreme malice they are capable of and known for, and passes the Senate with a number of Democrat votes… I am afraid President Trump is burdened with another Deep State sympathizer (like FBI Director Wray), or worse. DLH
PS In support of my contention that Brett Kavanaugh may be, at best, an unreliable Constitutional constructionist due to the effects of his bruising confirmation hearings, this post by Paul Mirengoff at PowerLine, provides some support for that concern, and an analysis even more concerning. Rather than a conservative majority on the Court, we have instead a Roberts/ Kavanaugh left of center collaboration. Not good…and quite disappointing. DLH
On To The Next “Scandal” of the Donald Trump Presidency
Proving there is no action by President Trump too small for Democrats to attempt to blow up into a major, democracy threatening scandal:
WASHINGTON—House Democrats said they would explore allegations President Trump has sought to limit documentation of his meetings with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Eliot Engel (D., N.Y.), responding to a Washington Post report about Mr. Trump’s meetings with the Russian leader, said his committee would hold hearings on the claims, in what could be one of the first actions by Democrats to probe the president since they took control of the House in January.
“Every time Trump meets with Putin, the country is told nothing,” Mr. Engel said in a written statement. “We will be holding hearings on the mysteries swirling around Trump’s bizarre relationship with Putin.” (Wall Street Journal, 1/14/19)
Of course, the sophisticated and well-informed readers of Veritaspac already know this is just another effort by the weak-willed and often malicious people that woefully ill-informed Democratic voters send to Washington to “represent” them (‘apologies’ to Congressperson Loebsack, and the QC Times… a lesser member of the forces who labor mightily to ‘ill-inform’ those voters) to mislead the American people about our current national leadership.
So, we’ll be brief. Just two points offered as ‘reminders’: 1) The “secrecy” Democrats claiming to surround President Trump’s meetings with Russian President Vladimir Putin, which so excites the media is undoubtedly the result of Mr. Trump’s experiences from the first days of his administration.
How many times did his conversations with foreign leaders, which every president has, and must have, were ‘leaked’ to the global press at almost the same time they were occurring. Whole transcripts of phone calls and brief comments to world leaders at meetings mysteriously falling into the hands of the press. obviously provided by what should be trusted members of the president’s team. Such things as this are historically kept confidential within the government by all presidents . Every president has observed this practice, to which the media has never raised a “grave concern”…until Donald Trump ‘upset’ the Establishment and the left.
In the Trump era, however, the unseemly, and perhaps illegal cozy relationship between the Deep State and the liberal media…with ‘leaks’ a principal weapon to bring down this president, is what IS unprecedented!
2) President Obama (he of the “scandal-free” administration) was found to have attempted to secretly promise the same Mr. Putin that, after he’s re-elected, he will be very much responsive to the Russian president’s desires. The American people would have been completely unaware of this potentially very dangerous, and most certainly furtive commitment had it not been picked up on a “hot mic” in which Obama provided his ‘assurance’ to then-Russian President Dimitri Medvedev
This, however, did not stir even the hairs on the pretty little heads of the NY Times editors. Instead, this revealed only a “moment of presidential ‘candor”!* (An excerpt of their “report is below.)
As we all know, “presidential candor” is something liberal presidents practice; Republican presidents, especially Donald Trump, engage in “collusion”! DLH
President Obama found his private moment of political candor caught by a live microphone on Monday as he told President Dmitri A. Medvedev of Russia that he would have “more flexibility” to negotiate on the delicate issue of missile defense after the November election, which Mr. Obama apparently feels confident he will win.
Mr. Obama’s Republican adversaries seized on the comment, which followed a meeting between Mr. Obama and Mr. Medvedev in Seoul, South Korea, where both had struggled to find common ground amid strong objections in Russia to the American plans for a missile defense system based in Europe.
As a pool of television journalists gathered for a news conference on the leaders’ meeting, Mr. Obama leaned in to deliver private assurances to Mr. Medvedev. But speaking inadvertently into an open microphone, he offered a frank assessment of the difficulty of reaching a deal — on this or any other subject — in an election year.
“On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved, but it’s important for him to give me space,” Mr. Obama could be heard saying to Mr. Medvedev, according a reporter from ABC News, who was traveling with the president. . . .
Excerpt from Clarice Feldman article at American Thinker: (graphic not in original)
. . . On the other hand, Congress apparently has had it with the FBI’s and DoJ’s continued efforts to keep us in the dark about the skullduggery that went on prior to and after the president was inaugurated and is beginning to leak what it found out. As the story unfolds, no one in those outfits’ higher ranks looks good, and the entire Mueller investigation appears to be, as Sharyl Attkisson in The Hill suggests, an effort to keep hidden and protect from disruption “long established money channels … secret machinations that could arguably land some people in prison.”
(a) Lisa Page Transcript The Epoch Times received a leaked transcript of the Lisa Page testimony before the Joint House Congressional Committee – testimony that implicates the present FBI deputy director, David Bowdich, in the FBI’s Russia investigation. And who has been keeping this testimony locked up from public scrutiny? David Bowdich, who also locked up the testimony of “confidential witness interviews” by the House Judiciary Committee: once again, the FBI posits its hold on “law enforcement sensitive information,” the possibility of revealing “classified information” and the need for the FBI, the Department and the Special Counsel’s Office to review this information.
Skeptics like “Sundance” believe that the Mueller investigation always had an ulterior purpose and that the refusal to release publicly what congressional investigations learned is part of the plan:
(1) Create an investigation — Just by creating the investigation it is then used as a shield by any corrupt FBI/DOJ official who would find himself/herself under downstream congressional investigation. Former officials being deposed/questioned by IG Horowitz or Congress could then say they are unable to answer those questions due to the ongoing special counsel investigation. In this way Mueller provides cover for ideologically aligned deep state officials. (2) Use the investigation to keep any and all inquiry focused away from the corrupt DOJ and FBI activity
(b) Here’s the Pony The New York Times, which has been desperately digging through the dung for years, finally found the pony: “No evidence has emerged publicly that Mr. Trump was secretly in contact with or took direction from Russian government officials.” Then they buried it as deep in the pile as they could in a story sourced to unnamed former law enforcement officials and “others familiar with the investigation.” . . .
Entire article, as always with Clarice, worth your attention. DLH
“Andre” (“Andre”? what happened to ‘Ahmed’, or ‘Muhammed’, or…?) Carson (D,IN) sees America’s future.
Andre is the ‘new’ Paul Revere (though no friend of America): “The Caliphate’s coming! The Caliphate’s coming!!”
But I think while I agree with Andre’s (unintended) ‘warning’, I think he’s being way too modest in his predictions: “30-35 Muslims in Congress with a Muslim president by 2030”?
I actually believe that we’ve already had a “Muslim president”, or at least the next best thing (from a CAIR perspective)! At least sort of like Bill Clinton was the first “Black President”
And “30-35 Muslims in Congress”? Had “Andre” said, “30-35 DEMOCRAT Muslims in Congress”! How can there be any doubters about that one?
If you want quick “transformation” of America, and the way “dedicated” Muslims (like “Sister” Tlaib…of ‘M..f..r’ fame) can deliver on that, the Democratic Party of today and the foreseeable future, along with the media, will give us 335 Muslims in Congress by 3024!
Sure. Right now, Muslims are being elected at a rapid pace in the cities and states, only with sizable Muslim population concentrations like Minnesota, Michigan, etc. But as the immigration policies are further weakened by intense Democratic party opposition to anything Trump tries to do to halt the current “y’all c’mon in, lotsa free stuff here” attitudes of the “uniparty’ those concentrations of such voters will increase rapidly and exponentially.
Coming soon, to your neighborhood…and congressional district! DLH
By Cristina Laila writing at Gateway Pundit: (excerpt)
Muslim Congressman Andre Carson (D-IN) envisioned a future of 30-35 Muslim members in Congress by 2030, who will be elected to powerful posts such as committee chairs, Speaker of the House and even President of the United States.
Congressman Carson gushed over the newly elected Muslim Congresswomen, foul-mouthed Rep. Rashida Tlaib, and Rep.Ilhan Omar, the woman who married her own brother, while speaking at a reception for terror-tied CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) on Thursday.
Carson fantasized about Rashida Tlaib, the Palestinian Rep who called President Trump “motherf*cker” the day she was sworn into office on a Quran, becoming Speaker of the House or a Senator. “We’ve got firepower in Congress. We’ve got sister Rashida [Tlaib] in the House, and she’s tough.” . . .
Yep. I can believe that if the nation wants a GOP president, there’s no one the Democrats would like better than…”Mittens”, or The Flake, or maybe ‘Reverend’ Kasich.
(You gotta love that Harry Reid! When God created “Man”, Harry thought it shoulda been ‘Harry and Nancy’, instead of Adam and Eve.) DLH
Harry Reid Endorses Mitt Romney for 2020 Republican Nominee for President Former Senate Leader Harry Reid endorsed Mitt Romney as the next Republican presidential nominee in 2020. “I think that he would be a great foil against Trump, and I think that Republicans may even allow him to be nominated to be the Republican nominee,” Reid said. “That would be good for the country.” The former Democratic Senate Leader praised Romney in a recent interview with Nevada radio station KNPR. Reid praised Romney’s op-ed critical of President Donald Trump that he wrote for the Washington Post. He also revealed he sent a message to Romney after the former presidential candidate was elected to the U.S. Senate, telling him he was “the moderate voice that Republicans need.” “That’s how I feel about Mitt Romney, I like him,” Reid said. Reid falsely claimed that Romney paid zero taxes on the Senate floor in the 2012 election when he was the Republican nominee challenging Obama. In his interview, Reid defended his false statement citing “ample evidence” but said he was glad he raised the issue because it forced Romney to release his taxes.
U.S. Media Really, Really, R.E.A.L.L.Y. Need Everyone to Know that Justice Ginsberg is Healthy… “The more he spoke of his honor, the faster we counted the spoons“… That’s the first sense that comes to mind as left-wing media narrative engineers keep pushing a story that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is “recovering”. How far would the left-wing apparatus go to ensure that President Donald Trump does not have an opportunity to replace another supreme court justice? As far as needed…. There are no boundaries too extreme on this issue. None. If the far-left political and institutional apparatus; including associates within the DOJ and FBI; were willing to work with allies in DC to frame an incredulous “rape gang” narrative against nominee Justice Kavanaugh; knowing their allied media would incredulously push the most absurd claim imaginable;… well, enough said. Justice Ginsburg will be “working” from home, invisibly, for a year or more… even if in a coma; hooked up to breathing apparatus, and being force-fed through a tube. Watch.
Some of the comments to the article at CT follow. Again, as we have cautioned, the site can tend to the conspiratorial, comments sardonic, which the way things are going may reflect reality. We commend this selection to you:
madashellowell says: After high quality taxidermy, no further treatment is generally required besides an occasional dusting.
Rachel Guess says: In fact doing a search on this subject these came up: ‘Pancreatic cancer is considered Stage IV if it has spread to distant locations in the body, such as the liver, lungs, or adjacent organs including the stomach, spleen, and/or the bowel. Sometimes it can only be determined that a pancreatic cancer is in Stage IV once surgery is completed.’ and ‘The median survival rate for stage 4 pancreatic cancer is between two and six months. Though the disease cannot be cured at this stage, treatment may improve your quality of life.’
pocaMAGAjunta says: “There are no boundaries too extreme on this issue. None.” . . .
mike says: … or the Moon over Parador variant. (liberal replacement body double in a banana republic)
gnome says: Life support is good. It’s when she starts issuing judgments from her home freezer you need to worry.
SPANGLER says: CNN reporting RBG entering Boston Marathon and beginning rigorous training thus requiring her missing court.
newamericandeplorable says: If RBG is unwell, I think they will run out the clock to meet Justice Scalia’s timeframe to deny President Trump his third SC appointment. This may be a conspiracy theory from my end but I will not put past the congress critters from doing this – especially after witnessing the lowest-of-low-life tactics they used against the last nominee.
Franklin says: Republicans are such panty waist! Demand that the Chief Jusitice Roberts and the Wise Latina pay her visit. The Democrats went bonkers over Trump’s medical checkup. Push back! Get a spine
WES says: RBG has two possible outcomes. One is grim. One is good but a slow recovery. If RBG’s lung cancer was secondary then she is dying. If RBG’s lung cancer is primary then her chances are good but recovery will be slow.
jkash (@USjkash2) says: RBG’s lung cancer is recurring after she’d had pancreatic and another form.In other words her body is getting different cancers.
GB Bari says: My problem has been that Chuck Grassley made the completely unnecessary decision to announce that he would not take up a replacement SCOTUS justice approval case in 2020. He – and the Republicans – owe NOTHING to the DemoncRATS for not approving Merrick Garland in 2016. And they still owe NOTHING to the DemoncRATs. There is no law about that, just tradition. But Madam Pelosi immediately threw out House traditions on January 1st. So screw the traditions. This is for more than just a few years. This is a lifetime appointment. Its far too important to throw away for a “courtesy” to a Party that will NEVER reciprocate to show any gracious appreciation.
jkash (@USjkash2) says: I don’t think she is worried about that legacy. According to her trainer, she dismisses her own mortality and according to the left itself, she adamantly opposed the enormous pressure during O’s administration to yield the bench to a younger successor. The woman is fueled by hate and by arrogance. As I wrote elsewhere, these are two primary ingredients for adrenaline.
shirley49 says: Trump would be wise to appoint a woman to replace her. Can you imagine the fun as the Dems accuse her of raping a male at a party and the feminists scrambling to figure out how to handle it. Either stick by the woman or throw her under the bus.
Are you deeply concerned about the “plight” of those 800,000 federal employees who are ‘losing their homes’, whose children are starving, etc?
Are you breathing a sigh of relief that President Trump is backing off declaring a national emergency ?
Really! What are your thoughts?
We have a few observations on these two topics…surprised?…and we want to share them…double surprise!?…
The supposed plight of the federal workers:
going without a paycheck! No end in sight! Sleeping under bridges! Their children begging for the change in your pocket! EPA District Managers, standing at intersections, holding signs with the pitifully scrawled plea, “Buddy, can you spare a dollar?
Oh, the humanity!!!
Our take: With universal knowledge that federal workers, likely to go unpaid for a few more days, or, yes, maybe weeks, will receive, in full their lost pay when the partial ‘shutdown’ ends, lenders are very unlikely to not work with their ‘customers’.
Those who ‘live paycheck to paycheck’? They, too, will not be shut out from getting a short term loan commercially, or be able to borrow from family to meet their needs in the short term. If they must pay “interest” on such borrowings, then isn’t that a price that must be paid for failure to manage one’s economic situation if only to a minimal extent.
Most other Americans experience similar temporary setbacks but Jim Costa and the QC Times aren’t there to cover their ‘tragic story’ and offer a tissue.
I come from a background in manufacturing. Those workers recognize that there are business cycles and various events that, at some point in their future, it may be necessary for their employer to temporarily suspend operations and they will be ‘laid off’ for a time. And, while they are usually eligible for unemployment compensation, they know that when the disruption ends and they return to work, they are not going to receive, IN FULL, the pay they lost! That is the lot of business cycles, seasonal businesses, labor disruptions.
And, for those “non-essential” federal employees, many are likely to be either enjoying their (eventually) fully paid vacation, or are working at other jobs, part-time or full.
A Declaration of a National Emergency…A Major Mistake For Trump To Do So:
If the president were to take such action…most objective experts agree he has the legal authority to do so, even if “Judge Napolitano”, Fox News, thinks not…it would set a terrible precedent, so the conventional wisdom goes.
Dana Perino, another Fox News political ‘expert’, agrees and even offers an ‘incisive anecdote’ to support her keen analysis. She reminded viewers of Harry Reid’s invocation of the “nuclear option” regarding the filibuster of judges. She grimly reminded us all how badly that turned out for the Democrats. “The precedent was thus set” and came back, big time, to haunt liberals , producing Supreme Court Justices Kavanaugh and Gorsuch!
Point well taken, Dana.
But, let’s take a closer look at Senator Reid’s “mistake”.
Agreed! We all believe that Reid made a big ‘goof’ with his “nuclear option”. But there are two things, perhaps, that many, even the big pundits and top ‘pols’ seem to overlook:
1) Years before Reid’s “ill-advised” exercise of the “nuclear option”, Republicans, then in the Senate majority, openly discussed invoking the same option. But, the ‘cooler heads’ warned, as Ms. Perino now does, that if they were to do so, it would set a ‘terribie precedent’, which a future Democrat majority would use with a vengeance against them!
And, so, wise Republicans…the “Gang of Eight”…, including the late, great John McCain, killed the idea, satisfied that they had, once again, ‘saved the Republic’.
But, thus what came to pass as soon as the Democrats did regain the Senate majority?
The ‘sainted’, Harry Reid, who had been among those who had warned of the awful damage to Senate decorum, national security, the Constitution itself, which would ensue from anyone invoking the dreaded “nuclear option”, INVOKED THE NUCLEAR OPTION!
Regardless how one might think about President Trump’s consideration of declaring a national emergency in order to get the border barrier, does anyone think that any future Democratic president (look at that lineup of would be candidates in 2020) would hesitate even one second, to declare a national emergency to get whatever socialist disaster they’ve dreamed of…not withstanding what Trump does????!! Huh?!
2) And, finally, the other point: We doubt there is any other GOP politician who would acknowledge the above, even to themselves, except Donald Trump (‘politician , not).
You can bet that President Trump knows full well that whether or not he uses the “national emergency” option to protect the border, the next Democratic president (God forbid) will not hesitate a nano-second to do so — to get whatever, socialized medicine, universal guaranteed income, free ‘whatever you want’, etc, etc… on the books. DLH
Here are a number of links to articles that cover topics pertinent to President Trump’s recent address to the nation — the issue of border security, the efficacy of a “wall” (barrier), presidential authority to build a wall by declaring a national emergency, efforts by the usual suspects to destroy national sovereignty, the effects of uncontrolled immigration, citizenship, and more.
One key source “going forward” the home page of which readers should bookmark is – Just Facts Daily whose slogan is “Be informed Not Just Opinionated” . The following are authored by James D. Agresti:
The first one below answers the contention by wall opponents (who want to do bupkis about illegal immigration anyway) that ~~ oh, the real problem that a wall won’t solve is visa overstays (initially issued in conformance with law). Well no one has contended “the wall” (physical barrier of some sort) is all that is necessary to control illegal immigration. But the contention pretty much admits that the illegal entrants that a wall would help prevent is comprised of a higher percentage of people who would not qualify for a visa of any sort – a criminal element with a conviction record. Other titles below are self-explanatory.
‘Gary Bauer writing at Campaign for Working Families gives a litany of arguments in support of the President’s speech
Here, here and here. Including this item referencing the real experts on border interdiction:
Kudos to Mark Morgan. He led the Border Patrol under Barack Obama and has the courage to say what no one on the left will: Walls work! The San Diego border wall reduced illegal immigration by more than 90%.
The problems of illegal immigration and mass migration extend well beyond border communities and deep into the interior of the country. There are tremendous costs imposed on taxpayers everywhere.
Because left-wing judges have ordered asylum seekers to be released pending their court hearings, thousands of people are coming in and are then released into various communities.
Via Patriot Post: Here you are provided the president’s remarks in full, key points in bold, annotated and followed by their analysis:
About the double aught – zeros Chuck and Nancy:Breitbart has more. Of cheerful note is that if these two and their little Beelzebub underlings are to be Trump’s antagonists, AOC et al, with all the media savvy at the Dem’s disposal, well Republicans could win this and the long game in (2020) if they hold fast. A movement could be created that paints “Democrats'” party regulars and rising stars as the anti-American anti-sovereignty people that they are. But then Trump cannot do it alone, he must be sustained. Perhaps through the avenues of various STATE and national conservative legislative leadership councils, make it very clear to various corporate interests, especially the Chamber of Commerce types, that their agenda goes nowhere until this overarching need is settled in favor of national sovereignty.
At the American Spectator — It comes down to one thing for Democrats: they need to import voters.
Libertarian Judge Napolitano says the President does not have authority to declare a national emergency to build a wall. Underlying his contention is that illegal immigration somehow does not rise to such a level of national emergency, the authority to declare such a national emergency is not Constitutional and that other processes are adequate. But as contended by one noted liberal and one noted conservative legal scholar, Congress has given the Executive branch wide ranging authority to declare national emergency. Napolitano is effectively rebutted as a matter of law but also just on the basis that well, we are being invaded. We would summarize that battalions, ne brigades of border jumpers effectively held back by nothing, are entering seeking to plunder US resources and that is a national emergency that can encompass a wall. Congress can choose to specify or reduce the authority if it disagrees but that also is subject to legislative and Constitutional processes. Absent that, Trump has been given the authority.