18 thoughts on “News/Politics 6-14-19

  1. Interesting.


    “The Justice Department plans to interview two senior CIA officers as part of a sweeping review of surveillance activities against the Trump campaign, The New York Times reported.

    Sources briefed on the plans told The Times that U.S. Attorney John Durham, who is leading the DOJ review, wants to speak with a senior CIA counterintelligence official and a senior CIA analyst who handled intelligence about Russian efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.

    Attorney General William Barr is interested in finding out more about the sources the CIA relied on to assess Russia’s goals in interfering in the election, according to The Times. He also wants to know about intelligence the CIA provided the FBI in summer 2016, including about Americans associated with the Trump campaign.

    One of the officials sought for an interview worked at a CIA counterintelligence mission center that worked closely with the FBI.

    CIA Director Gina Haspel does not plan to block the interviews, according to The Times.

    Barr, who picked Durham to lead the probe, has said he is concerned by information he has seen that U.S. agencies may have improperly surveilled members of the Trump campaign.”


  2. Sounds about right.

    Don’t ask what you can do you for your country, ask what your country can do for you.

    From Branco, via LI.


  3. The media giving a Dem a pass on a scandal isn’t at all shocking. It would be shocking if they didn’t.





  4. I will be sad to see her go. 🙂

    Jim Acosta, who plays a journalist at CNN, will be pleased. Now she won’t be able to make him cry into his journal anymore. 🙂



  5. Democrats are masters at projection. They are everything they accuse Trump of, and more.


    “Tucker Carlson: The left complains that Trump is lawless, but they are attacking the fabric of society”

    “One thing you can say about the left, they do get high marks for message discipline. Some functionary in the propaganda department comes up with a talking point and immediately, the entire herd — from senior Democrats in the United States Senate to weekend anchors on MSNBC and everyone in between — all of them shamelessly repeat in verbatim, like it’s an original thought.

    You’ve heard a lot of lines like that. One of them we’ve heard a lot recently is about Donald Trump and the law. The president, Democrats will tell you again and again, believes he is “above the law.”

    Rep. Jerrod Nadler, D-N.Y. and House Judiciary chairman: We have a president who believes he is above the law.

    Sen. Bernie Sander, I-Vt., 2020 presidential candidate: The American people do not want a president who believes that he is above the law.

    Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif.: In the United States of America, no one is above the law.

    Joe Biden, 2020 presidential candidate: An American president who has no respect for the rule of law.

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi: No one is above the law.

    Pete Buttigieg, South Bend, Ind, mayor and 2020 presidential candidate: What I will say is that no one ought to be above the law.

    Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., 2020 presidential candidate: No one is above the law, not even the president of the United States.

    “No one is above the law,” they thunder. Except, of course, the more than 20 million foreign nationals currently living in our country illegally, all under the care and the protection of the Democratic Party. They are, by definition, above the law. We can’t punish them, Democrats tell us; that would be racist.

    Drug dealers, too. They are suddenly above the law as well, according to the left. So are people who defecate on sidewalks and people who spraypaint overpasses, and people who shoot up in subway stations and leave dirty needles in parks. All crimes are no longer allowed to be acknowledged as crimes. There are huge new classes of people who are literally above the law.”

    And this category is growing, thanks to the activist left. On Tuesday night, in the State of Virginia, prosecutors backed by George Soros unseated incumbents in two large counties outside Washington, D.C. Both candidates have pledged to roll back criminal enforcement in a massive way. They will, among other things, abolish cash bail, stop enforcing drug laws, put more criminals back on the street. This kind of thing is happening all over the country and getting very little coverage.

    In Philadelphia, the murder rate is the highest it has been in a decade. Why is that? Well, a Soros-backed prosecutor called Larry Krasner stopped enforcing the law. Meanwhile, a left-wing DA in Dallas announced he will stop prosecuting people for most kinds of theft. In Dallas, thieves are now above the law.

    Beto O’Rourke approves of this trend. Not only should we legalize marijuana, Beto says, we ought to retroactively expunge the criminal records of everyone who broke the law while it existed.”


  6. Today’s faux media outrage du jour.

    Like good little parrots.


    Today’s faux scandal is President Trump’s statement, in an interview with former Clinton aide George Stephanopoulos, in which he was asked about receiving negative information about a political opponent from a foreign country. The Washington Post’s account is typical:

    President Donald Trump said Wednesday that if a foreign power offered dirt on his 2020 opponent, he’d be open to accepting it and that he’d have no obligation to call in the FBI.

    “I think I’d want to hear it,” Trump said in an interview with ABC News, adding, “There’s nothing wrong with listening.”

    Trump is right on both points, although whether it makes sense to call the FBI depends on what the information is. Suppose, for example, that Israeli intelligence discovered Bernie Sanders is cooperating with a Communist country. No doubt Trump should report that to the Bureau.”


    “Trump was not asked about “information stolen by foreign adversaries” in yesterday’s interview, so the alleged contradiction doesn’t exist. And how did Trump “use such information to his benefit in 2016,” a claim the Post repeats twice? Evidently they are talking about Trump’s occasional references to the shenanigans that the DNC pulled in order to guarantee Hillary Clinton the nomination, as revealed in DNC emails that were published by Wikileaks. Does the Post seriously think that Trump should have gone through the campaign without mentioning facts that everyone knew, on the theory that the Russians might have been the ones who originally phished the DNC’s email account? If so, the claim is ridiculous.

    A doddering Nancy Pelosi gave a press conference this morning, which she began by talking about Trump’s ABC interview:

    Everybody in the country should be totally appalled by what the president said last night. But he has a habit of making appalling statements. This one borders on so totally unethical that he doesn’t even realize it.

    As Trump told Stephanopoulos, there is nothing wrong with listening to information that anyone, foreign or domestic, might have that is relevant to a presidential candidate. But what is blindingly obvious, yet absent from every Democratic Party news account feigning horror at the ABC interview, is that the Hillary Clinton campaign didn’t just receive “foreign dirt” on the Trump campaign. It paid for foreign sources to fabricate lies about Trump, which it then disseminated to the press. Listen to “foreign dirt”? The Clinton paid for it!

    This is just one more example of why no sensible person takes “news” sources like the Washington Post seriously.”


  7. More on the pearl clutchers here.


    “President Donald Trump said the wrong thing again Wednesday, and of course some in the media – and practically all the Democratic presidential candidates – are spun up about it. Specifically, he told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos that he might listen to a foreign government offering opposition research on his political opponents at home and not tell the FBI. His exact words when asked whether his campaign would accept damaging information on his opponents from foreign governments – such as China or Russia – or hand it over to the FBI were, “I think maybe you do both. I think you might want to listen, there isn’t anything wrong with listening.” That was the wrong thing to say. No campaign should accept compromising information from a foreign government.

    That said, the media’s tunnel vision and failure to pursue the natural line of questioning about foreign influence in the 2016 campaign are surreal. Think for a moment if Hillary Clinton had to answer a similar question truthfully. If she were honest, she would have to answer something like, “Why, yes, my campaign would, through the general counsel’s law firm, employ a foreign national to contact sources in the Russian government and try to develop opposition research to use against my opponent, and then take it to the FBI and the media in order to disrupt my opponent’s campaign.” Is there something about this I am missing?

    Doesn’t the pearl-clutching over Trump saying that he might listen to whatever another government wants to share with him mean that those same pearl-clutchers should also be taking what Clinton’s campaign actually did very seriously? And yet, they are not. Instead, the Democrats and their allies in the media are savagely attacking Attorney General William Barr because he has rightly pledged to get to the bottom of how opposition research obtained and produced by foreigners for the sole purpose of disrupting one of the two viable presidential campaigns made its way into our system.”


    The reason they keep attacking Barr is because they know their reckoning is coming.


  8. Oh look, yet more verified collusion between Democrats and foreigners seeking to impact our elections that the media will ignore.


    “Left-wing billionaire George Soros scores wins in Virginia elections, as opponents say race was ‘bought’”

    “Liberal billionaire George Soros picked up two wins in Virginia this week when two prosecutor candidates he backed ousted incumbents in local Democratic primaries — after he poured nearly a million dollars into their campaigns.

    Soros, known for backing left-wing causes across the globe, used his Justice and Public Safety PAC to boost two liberal candidates against incumbent Democrats.


    He backed Parisa Dehghani-Tafti to beat Arlington County Commonwealth’s Attorney Theo Stamos, and supported former Justice Department employee Steve Descano in his race against Fairfax County Commonwealth’s Attorney Raymond Morrogh. Campaign finance reports show Dehghani-Tafti received $583,000 and Descano received $392,000 just from that PAC. Meanwhile, Stamos and Morrogh raised $162,000 and $242,000, respectively, for their entire campaigns.

    The money gave Tafti and Descano a significant financial advantage over the incumbents, despite their lack of experience. The Washington Post reported that while the two challengers have never prosecuted a case in a state court, they beat candidates with more than 60 years of experience between them.”


  9. Push back.



  10. It looks like that, because it is like that.



  11. My how things have changed. 🙂

    But some of always said he was a fraud.


    And Andy’s getting nervous. 🙂


  12. You’re the hackiest of hacks…..



  13. Well, there’s always The Bulwark…… It’s where the hackiest of hacks have all ended up. 🤣😅



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.