Even Crazy Jim Acosta of Fake News CNN agrees: “Trump World and WH sources dancing in end zone: Trump wins again…Schumer and Dems caved…gambled and lost.” Thank you for your honesty Jim!
Are we surprised that Trump will celebrate with the obligatory end-zone dance? No, but let’s just wait and see what comes out of all this. If the Dems are not careful, they’re going to have to come up with actual worker-friendly ideas in order to hold their ground this fall. This could be a good year for Republicans after all. And an even better year for working folk. It’s possible. :–)
Debra, My son and I have been having a continuing debate about how the Dems should run their fall campaign. He thinks they need to put out an agenda. I would assume that would be to further communize us. My thought is they should say as little as possible (hide their socialist and perverted leanings) and just let Trump be Trump.
My wife says it will make no difference what the Dems say or do. The focus all year is going to be on the latest #%@&hole remark or Stormy Daniels.
It is still early. I am not counting on my chocolate just yet.
Well, it has begun. We’ve placed new tariffs on washing machines and solar panels. Whirlpool says it will help. (Note: Whirlpool is a huge employer in my area.) But I fully expect that things will get tougher before they get better. You can’t undo 40 years of damage without some pain. My seat belt is buckled… :–)
My wife has prepared us well for a trade war. The cars and appliances are new and we have all the clothes and junk we will ever need (though she will dispute that).
Now it is my turn. If it really is the start of a trade war, we need to sell much of our American stock portfolio. Where and in what do we invest? Being a good steward may have become a little harder.
Debra @ 8:24
The nations to the south of us have all the resources that we have.
The difference is that they don’t trust the law enforcement.
If you can’t trust the law enforcement, the country can’t last.
“During the Republican primaries, I was very nearly a Never Trumper, so I’m quite sympathetic to that mindset. But I have a challenge for all of you who still identify as Never Trumpers: Are you willing to be as honest about the accomplishments of President Trump as you are about his failings?
For many of you who could not vote for Trump, it was a matter of conscience. How could you be a “values voter” and yet vote for a man with such abysmal moral values, a thrice-married, playboy, billionaire?
Put another way, your integrity compelled you to be a Never Trumper. But does your integrity now compel you to admit where he has done well? Where he has kept his promises? Where he has championed causes that really matter to “value voters”? Where he has stood strong for the some of the great moral issues of the day?
Lest you think I’m being one-sided in my challenge to Never Trumpers, in June I wrote an article titled, “Don’t Sell Your Soul Defending the Words of President Trump.” And earlier this month I penned, “As Evangelicals Our Ultimate Allegiance is to the Lord, Not the President,” just to give two examples.
In short, I concur with prominent Never Trumper David French, who just last month counseled his colleagues to follow these guidelines: “Praise him when he’s right, critique him when he’s wrong, apply the same standards to your own side that you apply to ideological opponents, and keep your eyes fixed on the larger, more important cultural trends.””
—————————-
“But have Never Trumpers done this? On a regular basis, those of us who voted for Trump are called on to repudiate his latest ill-advised comment or tweet, or to condemn a past indiscretion. And with words similar to French’s, I recently wrote, “When the president does the right thing, we commend him and encourage him. When he does the wrong thing, with full respect for his office, we express our differences. Is this really so hard?”
But I ask again, have you done this as Never Trumpers? Doesn’t your integrity compel you to be even-handed, or, perhaps, to acknowledge where, at times, you may have been wrong?”
—————————
“President Donald Trump on Monday approved tariffs on imported solar-energy components and large washing machines in a bid to help U.S. manufacturers.
The Republican’s decision followed recommendations for tariffs by the U.S. International Trade Commission.
“The president’s action makes clear again that the Trump administration will always defend American workers, farmers, ranchers, and businesses in this regard,” U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer said in a statement announcing the decision.
Most imported solar modules will face an immediate tariff of 30 percent, with the rate declining before phasing out after four years. For large residential washing machines, tariffs will start at up to 50 percent and phase out after three years.
China accused Trump of jeopardizing the multilateral trading system by taking action on complaints under U.S. law instead of through the World Trade Organization.
“The U.S. side once again abused its trade remedy measures,” said a Commerce Ministry statement. “China expresses its strong dissatisfaction with this.”
Mexico said Trump’s decision not to exclude it from the measures was “regrettable.”
“Mexico will use all available legal resources in response to the U.S. decision to apply protections on Mexican washing machines and solar panels,” its Economy Department said in a statement.
The U.S. solar industry was split over the trade barriers.”
The Trump Cult scolding others for lack of honesty?
What is next?
1. The Trump Cult scolding others for lack of marital fidelity?
2. The Trump Cult scolding others for lack of knowledge of government or economics?
3. The Trump Cult scolding others for misuse of a Forbes magazine?
We bought a washing machine yesterday. On sale so it was already here, whew.
One of my relatives who does business in China said a year ago China has a world-wide years worth of refrigerators in warehouses. Tariffs a d trade wars will affect them.
Ha. It seems incongruous doesn’t it, Ricky. I have often wondered about ‘free traders’ who extol the virtues of trade with communist China. It just goes to show that people can put up with much inconsistency if they believe it’s for a better good…or for their own good. ;–)
My appliances are mostly 20 and 30 yrs old— Maytag (local) and Kenmore (made in USA). Except for the new freezer (Frigidaire) which I’m told was also US made. When it’s time to replace the gas range or dryer, I will be pleased to pay the going rate for something made in the USA. But the way my good ol’ USA products are running, that may not be for many more years. ;–)
Debra, You have made me curious. I must now get on the floor to see if our Samsung washer and dryer were assembled in South Korea or one of the 79 other countries where the company operates. I am certain it contains parts from many countries as do modern Whirlpools.
Debra @ 11:05 Capitalism and free trade have lifted around a billion people out of extreme poverty while also benefiting richer countries and consumers, businesses and workers in those richer countries.
So it is for “a better good” and “their own good”. This is taught in most freshman Intro to Macro-economics courses.
How to fix a non-market system (like the US healthcare system) on which hundreds of millions rely and in which tens of millions earn a living is a much more complex problem. I took four doctoral level courses dealing with such problems and they were my favorite courses. Still it is like a Rubik’s Cube with people’s health and economic welfare at stake. You could also describe it as untangling 10 spools of yarn.
Ricky, though it was not my major, I have had that class in Macroeconomics…and microeconomics, and international economics as well . Micro is much more predictable, while macro and international movements are much less so. But for those whose goal is to rule the world and remake it in their own image, the power those big aggregate numbers produce are essential. This, for example, is why we have economists who will argue that insurance is just as good a product as the handbag it insures. But this is not accurate in anything but a perfect world of endless plenty. Because people require physical goods, and while insurance is a grease that can keep the machine running in a pinch, it can not replace the doctor when your appendix bursts, and it does not put a potato on your plate when there is a famine.
Since you’ve had that many high level courses in healthcare systems, I would expect your views to be a little more…shall we say, nuanced, than they typically are. Why is it that you don’t seem to have a problem with the heavily subsidized healthcare systems of other countries like Hong Kong or Switzerland, and yet you have nothing positive to say to those who want to reform ours to be somewhat similar. Hong Kong spends less than half the GDP% that we spend, and covers everyone.
Switzerland’s healthcare system is not nearly as highly subsidized (in terms of % of GDP) as ours. It is just more efficient. Governments (State, federal and local) in the US spend a higher percentage of GDP on healthcare than the total (private and public) healthcare spending of Switzerland, Hong Kong or any other country on earth. That doesn’t include US private spending (including private insurance) and we don’t have universal coverage.
However, to begin making changes will be extremely painful to consumers and providers, particularly to Democrats, Trumpkins, doctors and pharmaceutical companies.
Drastic changes are always painful. That’s one reason I usually prefer incremental change. So, given the pain, is Obamacare worth keeping and tweaking? Or was that just another big mess…
Also, it seems that increasing the supply of medical personnel might be a worthwhile subsidy.
Actually, TN recently said it is providing tuition-free state college for residents. I have not checked that out to see what the parameters of the program are, but it could encourage at least low level medical training.
“We now know a lot more about the sequence of events, which now strongly suggests that the tarmac meeting was not the start of events that led to the exoneration. Rather, it now appears that the tarmac meeting was the end of that process, the signal to the Clintons that all was taken care of.
The key facts we know now but did not know then are:
The tarmac meeting was planned, not spontaneous, as we covered on August 5, 2017, ACLJ: DOJ Document Dump Shows Lynch-Clinton Tarmac Summit Planned, Media Coverup.
The conduct of Lynch in trying to conceal details was not consistent with it being an innocent meeting, as we covered on August 7, 2017, Loretta Lynch used alias “Elizabeth Carlisle” to email about Bill Clinton tarmac meeting and August 10, 2017, Why did Loretta Lynch need DOJ Talking Points about a meeting she alone attended?
The FBI has tried its best not to produce documents regarding the tarmac meeting, and when it did, those documents focused heavily on how the meeting was discovered, as Judicial Watch reported on November 30, 2017.
The FBI decided, sometime by early May 2016, not to charge Hillary. The drafts of the exoneration statement now are public, and show a concerted effort to reword the language to support exoneration. These drafts took place prior to the tarmac meeting and prior to the interview of Hillary on July 4th weekend.
Senior FBI agent Peter Strzok, who was part of the team investigating Hillary, was removed from the Mueller investigation of supposed Russia collusion in the summer of 2016 for sending anti-Trump text messages (though the removal was not disclosed for several months). Strzok was involved in editing and softening the Comey draft exoneration statement.
Strzok was having an affair with FBI lawyer Lisa Page, Based on text messages recently released, it appears they believed Hillary would not be charged and suggested Lynch Knew the Outcome of FBI Hillary Probe in Advance.
So what significance does the tarmac meeting take in this new context?
Remember, Lynch insisted that she and Clinton only talked about grandchildren and other non-investigation matters during that half hour conversation. That didn’t make sense if the tarmac meeting was the start of a collusive effort, there must have been something more.
But the tarmac meeting being only small talk does make sense if it was the end point, not the starting point. By then, it was clear within the FBI that Hillary would be exonerated, the statement already was drafted and re-drafted and reviewed, and Lynch likely knew it. Hillary’s interview, which was not under oath and not recorded, was a formality so the predetermined decision could assume the patina of legitimacy.
So the tarmac meeting very likely signaled to Hillary through Bill that all was good, that there was nothing to worry about regarding her upcoming FBI interview.”
Now this is interesting. Apparently, the US is not the only one imposing tariffs on the solar panels: the EU and India have already done so. Maybe countries are finally weary of the Chinese government’s undue interference in the market….
….Remarkably, the administration is following the example of the European Union — which generally supports renewable energy.
Dave Keating of Fortune noted Tuesday that the EU “did the exact same thing in September of last year.” They set minimum import duties for Chinese solar modules and cells that price them up to 30 percent above market levels,” he wrote.
And earlier this week, India imposed a 70 percent import duty on Chinese and Malaysian solar panels, stirring debate similar to that surrounding the U.S. announcement on Tuesday…..
His comment on energy is interesting and Milton Friedman would have fun explaining it. Basically, the free market price for solar panels would be almost zero without government subsidies and regulations, both here and in Europe. In a free market, clean natural gas would run solar energy out of business except for very special situations. So not only are our government and the foolish European governments forcing their people to use expensive solar energy, they are now forcing them to buy these stupid panels for prices above what the Chinese are willing to charge.
After The Trump Cult and its sad gang of media and Congressional toadies have attacked Comey, Mueller and the FBI nonstop for months, it is going to be really funny if Mueller concludes his investigation with a statement about Trump that parallels Comey’s concluding statement about Hillary:
Trump did some really dumb things and committed some technical violations of the law. However, his errors were mistakes were acts of extreme ignorance rather than malice, so no punishment is recommended.
In such a case the Democrats will go nuts. Will the Trumpkins be able to do a quick 180 and start to praise Mueller?
Evangelical leaders talk too much. But let’s be clear, these news reporters and Trump haters are always going to latch on to the most negative slant possible. Leaders need to understand they are walking into a lion’s den in every interview.
Debra, I agree that evangelical leaders talk too much. They should not do these interviews.
Having said that, if the Wall Street Journal had reported in 2010 that Obama had paid a porn star $130,000 two weeks before the 2008 election to keep silent about their affair, Rush, Hannity, Levin, Tony Perkins and Robert Jeffress would still be talking about it, using the most negative slant possible. By the way, what would be the positive slant of paying off a porn star girlfriend?
One of the interesting things about the Mueller investigation is that virtually all of Trump’s aides and former aides have more respected lawyers than does Trump. Trump was rejected as a client by almost twenty law firms in Washington because his reputation is that he:
1. Won’t follow the advice of his counsel; and
2. Won’t pay his bill.
Wandering Views 
Secret societies at the FBI and DoJ?
You realize such fifth column, soft-coups are treasonous, right?
Time to subpoena Comey again, and put him under oath, so this time when he lies you can nail him for it..
LikeLiked by 2 people
A civics lesson from Yuval Levin:
LikeLiked by 1 person
The church and the opioid crisis:
http://www.christianitytoday.com/edstetzer/2018/january/churchs-response-to-opioid-crisis-practical-tool-kit-for-fa.html
LikeLiked by 1 person
It seems that Mona Charen is as prone to sports faux pas as are my wife and my daughter-in-law. We like our women to be women.
LikeLike
How the Republicans won:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/white-house-shutdown-strategy-keep-trump-contained/2018/01/22/76815c22-ffaa-11e7-8acf-ad2991367d9d_story.html?utm_term=.5a0ba799897c
LikeLike
Always the good sport:
LikeLiked by 1 person
Are we surprised that Trump will celebrate with the obligatory end-zone dance? No, but let’s just wait and see what comes out of all this. If the Dems are not careful, they’re going to have to come up with actual worker-friendly ideas in order to hold their ground this fall. This could be a good year for Republicans after all. And an even better year for working folk. It’s possible. :–)
LikeLike
Ricky @7:34 The one branch of government that was supposed to be the weakest, wags the dog on a regular basis. Our judiciary is in need of overhaul.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Debra, My son and I have been having a continuing debate about how the Dems should run their fall campaign. He thinks they need to put out an agenda. I would assume that would be to further communize us. My thought is they should say as little as possible (hide their socialist and perverted leanings) and just let Trump be Trump.
My wife says it will make no difference what the Dems say or do. The focus all year is going to be on the latest #%@&hole remark or Stormy Daniels.
It is still early. I am not counting on my chocolate just yet.
https://realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/2018_generic_congressional_vote-6185.html
LikeLiked by 1 person
Debra @ 8:24 Agreed. It has been that way since the Warren Court of the 60s.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, it has begun. We’ve placed new tariffs on washing machines and solar panels. Whirlpool says it will help. (Note: Whirlpool is a huge employer in my area.) But I fully expect that things will get tougher before they get better. You can’t undo 40 years of damage without some pain. My seat belt is buckled… :–)
Click to access 201%20Cases%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf
LikeLike
Ricky @8:31 At this point, it could go either way. I’m just praying for mercy—whatever that looks like. ;–/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank goodness we bought our new Samsung washing machine and dryer 6 months ago.
LikeLiked by 1 person
My wife has prepared us well for a trade war. The cars and appliances are new and we have all the clothes and junk we will ever need (though she will dispute that).
Now it is my turn. If it really is the start of a trade war, we need to sell much of our American stock portfolio. Where and in what do we invest? Being a good steward may have become a little harder.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Charen’s married to an Eagle fan, and producing more?
No wonder I don’t much care for Mona.
And the Eagles aren’t “America’s Team.”
That would be the stinkin’ Cowboys.
The Eagles are just “Belichick and Brady’s Next Victims.”
LikeLike
Debra @ 8:24
The nations to the south of us have all the resources that we have.
The difference is that they don’t trust the law enforcement.
If you can’t trust the law enforcement, the country can’t last.
LikeLiked by 1 person
More anonymous sources seeking to take Trump’s credit, Ricky?
Why am I not surprised…. that WaPo would print it, and that you’d fall for it.
You need to be more honest if you want folks to believe anything you say about the man.
This should help, if you’re up to it. Maybe.
https://townhall.com/columnists/michaelbrown/2018/01/22/an-honest-challenge-for-the-never-trumpers-n2437690
“During the Republican primaries, I was very nearly a Never Trumper, so I’m quite sympathetic to that mindset. But I have a challenge for all of you who still identify as Never Trumpers: Are you willing to be as honest about the accomplishments of President Trump as you are about his failings?
For many of you who could not vote for Trump, it was a matter of conscience. How could you be a “values voter” and yet vote for a man with such abysmal moral values, a thrice-married, playboy, billionaire?
Put another way, your integrity compelled you to be a Never Trumper. But does your integrity now compel you to admit where he has done well? Where he has kept his promises? Where he has championed causes that really matter to “value voters”? Where he has stood strong for the some of the great moral issues of the day?
Lest you think I’m being one-sided in my challenge to Never Trumpers, in June I wrote an article titled, “Don’t Sell Your Soul Defending the Words of President Trump.” And earlier this month I penned, “As Evangelicals Our Ultimate Allegiance is to the Lord, Not the President,” just to give two examples.
In short, I concur with prominent Never Trumper David French, who just last month counseled his colleagues to follow these guidelines: “Praise him when he’s right, critique him when he’s wrong, apply the same standards to your own side that you apply to ideological opponents, and keep your eyes fixed on the larger, more important cultural trends.””
—————————-
“But have Never Trumpers done this? On a regular basis, those of us who voted for Trump are called on to repudiate his latest ill-advised comment or tweet, or to condemn a past indiscretion. And with words similar to French’s, I recently wrote, “When the president does the right thing, we commend him and encourage him. When he does the wrong thing, with full respect for his office, we express our differences. Is this really so hard?”
But I ask again, have you done this as Never Trumpers? Doesn’t your integrity compel you to be even-handed, or, perhaps, to acknowledge where, at times, you may have been wrong?”
—————————
LikeLike
Here’s some details on those tariffs….
I still don’t like the idea.
https://apnews.com/5f68ab2a45124b29be5dfbfc474dde73/Trump-hits-solar-panels,-washing-machines-with-tariffs
“President Donald Trump on Monday approved tariffs on imported solar-energy components and large washing machines in a bid to help U.S. manufacturers.
The Republican’s decision followed recommendations for tariffs by the U.S. International Trade Commission.
“The president’s action makes clear again that the Trump administration will always defend American workers, farmers, ranchers, and businesses in this regard,” U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer said in a statement announcing the decision.
Most imported solar modules will face an immediate tariff of 30 percent, with the rate declining before phasing out after four years. For large residential washing machines, tariffs will start at up to 50 percent and phase out after three years.
China accused Trump of jeopardizing the multilateral trading system by taking action on complaints under U.S. law instead of through the World Trade Organization.
“The U.S. side once again abused its trade remedy measures,” said a Commerce Ministry statement. “China expresses its strong dissatisfaction with this.”
Mexico said Trump’s decision not to exclude it from the measures was “regrettable.”
“Mexico will use all available legal resources in response to the U.S. decision to apply protections on Mexican washing machines and solar panels,” its Economy Department said in a statement.
The U.S. solar industry was split over the trade barriers.”
LikeLike
The Trump Cult scolding others for lack of honesty?
What is next?
1. The Trump Cult scolding others for lack of marital fidelity?
2. The Trump Cult scolding others for lack of knowledge of government or economics?
3. The Trump Cult scolding others for misuse of a Forbes magazine?
LikeLiked by 1 person
We bought a washing machine yesterday. On sale so it was already here, whew.
One of my relatives who does business in China said a year ago China has a world-wide years worth of refrigerators in warehouses. Tariffs a d trade wars will affect them.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Ha. It seems incongruous doesn’t it, Ricky. I have often wondered about ‘free traders’ who extol the virtues of trade with communist China. It just goes to show that people can put up with much inconsistency if they believe it’s for a better good…or for their own good. ;–)
LikeLike
My appliances are mostly 20 and 30 yrs old— Maytag (local) and Kenmore (made in USA). Except for the new freezer (Frigidaire) which I’m told was also US made. When it’s time to replace the gas range or dryer, I will be pleased to pay the going rate for something made in the USA. But the way my good ol’ USA products are running, that may not be for many more years. ;–)
LikeLike
Yeah, I figured you were all talk (and name calling), and not really up for doing the right thing. 🙂
LikeLike
Debra, You have made me curious. I must now get on the floor to see if our Samsung washer and dryer were assembled in South Korea or one of the 79 other countries where the company operates. I am certain it contains parts from many countries as do modern Whirlpools.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Electronics
LikeLiked by 1 person
In terms of carbon footprint and economy, the world would be better off having solar panels made in California.
But activists don’t like to hear that.
Also in California, the solar panel laws change, which will make them far less cost effective. Another hidden secret.
LikeLiked by 1 person
In 2020.
LikeLike
Debra @ 11:05 Capitalism and free trade have lifted around a billion people out of extreme poverty while also benefiting richer countries and consumers, businesses and workers in those richer countries.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/358771/capitalisms-triumph-michael-tanner
So it is for “a better good” and “their own good”. This is taught in most freshman Intro to Macro-economics courses.
How to fix a non-market system (like the US healthcare system) on which hundreds of millions rely and in which tens of millions earn a living is a much more complex problem. I took four doctoral level courses dealing with such problems and they were my favorite courses. Still it is like a Rubik’s Cube with people’s health and economic welfare at stake. You could also describe it as untangling 10 spools of yarn.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Ricky, though it was not my major, I have had that class in Macroeconomics…and microeconomics, and international economics as well . Micro is much more predictable, while macro and international movements are much less so. But for those whose goal is to rule the world and remake it in their own image, the power those big aggregate numbers produce are essential. This, for example, is why we have economists who will argue that insurance is just as good a product as the handbag it insures. But this is not accurate in anything but a perfect world of endless plenty. Because people require physical goods, and while insurance is a grease that can keep the machine running in a pinch, it can not replace the doctor when your appendix bursts, and it does not put a potato on your plate when there is a famine.
Since you’ve had that many high level courses in healthcare systems, I would expect your views to be a little more…shall we say, nuanced, than they typically are. Why is it that you don’t seem to have a problem with the heavily subsidized healthcare systems of other countries like Hong Kong or Switzerland, and yet you have nothing positive to say to those who want to reform ours to be somewhat similar. Hong Kong spends less than half the GDP% that we spend, and covers everyone.
LikeLike
Switzerland’s healthcare system is not nearly as highly subsidized (in terms of % of GDP) as ours. It is just more efficient. Governments (State, federal and local) in the US spend a higher percentage of GDP on healthcare than the total (private and public) healthcare spending of Switzerland, Hong Kong or any other country on earth. That doesn’t include US private spending (including private insurance) and we don’t have universal coverage.
However, to begin making changes will be extremely painful to consumers and providers, particularly to Democrats, Trumpkins, doctors and pharmaceutical companies.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Drastic changes are always painful. That’s one reason I usually prefer incremental change. So, given the pain, is Obamacare worth keeping and tweaking? Or was that just another big mess…
Also, it seems that increasing the supply of medical personnel might be a worthwhile subsidy.
Actually, TN recently said it is providing tuition-free state college for residents. I have not checked that out to see what the parameters of the program are, but it could encourage at least low level medical training.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hmmmmm….. an Obama and Clinton favorite, which is fitting, since he was doing their dirty work. Expensive too.
https://twitter.com/PoliticalShort/status/955828453349011456
LikeLike
No response, why am I not surprised….
https://www.weaselzippers.us/372097-ari-fleischer-and-ed-henry-question-comey-about-fbi-texts-that-conflict-with-what-he-said-under-oath/
LikeLike
And now it makes sense. And Comey is neck-deep in it all.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2018/01/loretta-lynch-bill-clinton-tarmac-meeting-now-makes-sense-it-was-the-end-not-the-beginning/#more-240213
“We now know a lot more about the sequence of events, which now strongly suggests that the tarmac meeting was not the start of events that led to the exoneration. Rather, it now appears that the tarmac meeting was the end of that process, the signal to the Clintons that all was taken care of.
The key facts we know now but did not know then are:
The tarmac meeting was planned, not spontaneous, as we covered on August 5, 2017, ACLJ: DOJ Document Dump Shows Lynch-Clinton Tarmac Summit Planned, Media Coverup.
The conduct of Lynch in trying to conceal details was not consistent with it being an innocent meeting, as we covered on August 7, 2017, Loretta Lynch used alias “Elizabeth Carlisle” to email about Bill Clinton tarmac meeting and August 10, 2017, Why did Loretta Lynch need DOJ Talking Points about a meeting she alone attended?
The FBI has tried its best not to produce documents regarding the tarmac meeting, and when it did, those documents focused heavily on how the meeting was discovered, as Judicial Watch reported on November 30, 2017.
The FBI decided, sometime by early May 2016, not to charge Hillary. The drafts of the exoneration statement now are public, and show a concerted effort to reword the language to support exoneration. These drafts took place prior to the tarmac meeting and prior to the interview of Hillary on July 4th weekend.
Senior FBI agent Peter Strzok, who was part of the team investigating Hillary, was removed from the Mueller investigation of supposed Russia collusion in the summer of 2016 for sending anti-Trump text messages (though the removal was not disclosed for several months). Strzok was involved in editing and softening the Comey draft exoneration statement.
Strzok was having an affair with FBI lawyer Lisa Page, Based on text messages recently released, it appears they believed Hillary would not be charged and suggested Lynch Knew the Outcome of FBI Hillary Probe in Advance.
So what significance does the tarmac meeting take in this new context?
Remember, Lynch insisted that she and Clinton only talked about grandchildren and other non-investigation matters during that half hour conversation. That didn’t make sense if the tarmac meeting was the start of a collusive effort, there must have been something more.
But the tarmac meeting being only small talk does make sense if it was the end point, not the starting point. By then, it was clear within the FBI that Hillary would be exonerated, the statement already was drafted and re-drafted and reviewed, and Lynch likely knew it. Hillary’s interview, which was not under oath and not recorded, was a formality so the predetermined decision could assume the patina of legitimacy.
So the tarmac meeting very likely signaled to Hillary through Bill that all was good, that there was nothing to worry about regarding her upcoming FBI interview.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Now this is interesting. Apparently, the US is not the only one imposing tariffs on the solar panels: the EU and India have already done so. Maybe countries are finally weary of the Chinese government’s undue interference in the market….
LikeLike
As usual Sasse is right. Fortunately, Michelle and my wife got in under the wire:
https://twitter.com/jameshohmann/status/955590494687498241
His comment on energy is interesting and Milton Friedman would have fun explaining it. Basically, the free market price for solar panels would be almost zero without government subsidies and regulations, both here and in Europe. In a free market, clean natural gas would run solar energy out of business except for very special situations. So not only are our government and the foolish European governments forcing their people to use expensive solar energy, they are now forcing them to buy these stupid panels for prices above what the Chinese are willing to charge.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Tony Perkins is making the rounds of TV shows, embarrassing himself.
LikeLiked by 1 person
After The Trump Cult and its sad gang of media and Congressional toadies have attacked Comey, Mueller and the FBI nonstop for months, it is going to be really funny if Mueller concludes his investigation with a statement about Trump that parallels Comey’s concluding statement about Hillary:
Trump did some really dumb things and committed some technical violations of the law. However, his errors were mistakes were acts of extreme ignorance rather than malice, so no punishment is recommended.
In such a case the Democrats will go nuts. Will the Trumpkins be able to do a quick 180 and start to praise Mueller?
LikeLike
Evangelical leaders talk too much. But let’s be clear, these news reporters and Trump haters are always going to latch on to the most negative slant possible. Leaders need to understand they are walking into a lion’s den in every interview.
LikeLike
The rest of the story?
LikeLike
Debra, I agree that evangelical leaders talk too much. They should not do these interviews.
Having said that, if the Wall Street Journal had reported in 2010 that Obama had paid a porn star $130,000 two weeks before the 2008 election to keep silent about their affair, Rush, Hannity, Levin, Tony Perkins and Robert Jeffress would still be talking about it, using the most negative slant possible. By the way, what would be the positive slant of paying off a porn star girlfriend?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Question answered:
http://babylonbee.com/news/trump-merely-sharing-gospel-porn-star-explains-jim-bakker/
LikeLike
Like I said at 7:20: He is extremely ignorant rather than malicious.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-asked-the-acting-fbi-director-whom-he-voted-for-during-oval-office-meeting/2018/01/23/2cb50818-0073-11e8-8acf-ad2991367d9d_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_mccabe-815pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.5312fa3e19a9
LikeLike
This, on the other hand IS malicious.
LikeLike
Are you saying these people are lying about the ‘secret society’ message? Or that the messages are malicious?
LikeLike
Fox News garbage? Yes. That stuff is generally ignorant and malicious.
LikeLike
It looks like Gates may also be cooperating with Mueller.
One of the interesting things about the Mueller investigation is that virtually all of Trump’s aides and former aides have more respected lawyers than does Trump. Trump was rejected as a client by almost twenty law firms in Washington because his reputation is that he:
1. Won’t follow the advice of his counsel; and
2. Won’t pay his bill.
LikeLike