29 thoughts on “News/Politics 10-18-19

  1. Tick-tock. It’s only a matter of time now…….


    “AG Barr’s special Russia investigator obtained BlackBerrys tied to launch of FBI Russia-Trump probe”

    “It was special investigator John Durham who acquired two BlackBerrys used by Joseph Mifsud, the Maltese professor who jumped-started the FBI’s long Russia probe into President Trump’s campaign.

    Sidney Powell, attorney for retired Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, filed a court motion on Monday disclosing the phones’ existence while tying them to Western intelligence.

    She told The Washington Times on Thursday that she has confirmed that it was Mr. Durham’s office who obtained them.

    Attorney General William P. Barr assigned Mr. Durham, the U.S. attorney for Connecticut, the mission of finding out the origins of the FBI’s counter-intelligence investigation known as Crossfire Hurricane. She told The Times that a “source,” whom she declined to identify, told her about the BlackBerrys.

    Mr. Mifsud, a university professor and well-traveled lecturer, told George Papadopoulos, a Trump campaign adviser, in London in April 2016 that Moscow owned thousands of Hillary Clinton emails. When the news reached the FBI in July, agent Peter Strzok initiated the probe.”

    The FBI and special counsel Robert Mueller have always contended that Mr. Mifsud was a Russian asset. Mr. Mueller’s final report made no mention of the numerous associations Mr. Mifsud maintained with Western diplomats and intelligence figures.

    Mr. Papadopoulos contends Mr. Mifsud was a Western agent sent to entrap him.

    By the spring of 2016, the FBI knew that Russian intelligence was hacking Democratic Party computers.

    Ms. Powell has added to the Mifsud intrigue with her motion before District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan asking him to order the government to turn over the BlackBerrys’ data. The filing lists the two phones’ model number, PIN and SIM card information.

    She told the judge that on Oct. 11 she asked the prosecution for phone data. She was ignored until she sent notification days later that she planned to file the discovery motion.”


  2. What a joke they are.


    The United Nations Human Rights Council has been a bad joke for a long time, with many of the world’s worst human rights abusers honored with membership. But tomorrow we will see the reductio ad absurdum, as Mauritania is voted onto the Human Rights Council.

    Mauritania, the west African nation where slavery remains a widespread practice, is expected to be voted on to the United Nations’ Human Rights Council on Thursday.
    Mauritania made slavery illegal in 1981, but did not criminalize the practice of owning slaves until 2007. It was the last country to abolish slavery. According to a 2012 CNN report, only one slave owner had been prosecuted for owning another human being since the practice was made illegal.

    While the Mauritanian government officially denies that slavery is ongoing in the country, Mauritanian watchdog groups allege that one out of every two members of the country’s Haratine ethnic minority group are enslaved, and that as many as 20% of the population is enslaved. The exact number of slaves within the country is unclear, and estimates range from 90,000 to 500,000. The Global Slavery Index estimates more than 140,000 people are currently enslaved in the country.”

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Speaking of jokes….

    Nancy Pelosi took her toys and went home again.


  4. Third Fourth time is the charm.


    “Jason Chaffetz: Pelosi and impeachment – There have already been 3 votes. Here’s why there may not be a fourth”

    “Speaker Pelosi isn’t refusing to hold a vote on impeachment. She is refusing to hold a fourth vote on impeachment. There have already been three votes. They all failed. Miserably.

    In other words, Congress has explicitly voted NOT to pursue impeachment.

    In December 2017, January 2018, and against in July 2019 under Pelosi’s leadership, the House held votes on whether to open an impeachment inquiry. The results weren’t even close.

    All three votes came up as “privileged resolutions.” Under Congressional rules, members can vote to table the resolution or to proceed. To affirmatively table a privileged resolution kills it, meaning the resolution has failed.

    Though the first two impeachment votes came up during the Republican majority, the votes to reject or table them were indisputably bipartisan.

    In December 2017 there were 126 Democrats who joined House Republicans to reject Rep. Al Green’s impeachment resolution 364-58.

    A month later, a new resolution was introduced with similar results: Again, 121 Democrats voted to table. Support for impeachment rose from 58 votes in December to 66 in January. But that was before Democrats won a majority in 2018 and Nancy Pelosi became Speaker.

    With Democrats having won dozens of new seats, Rep. Green tried again just three months ago in July 2019. His impeachment resolution was one of four introduced in the 116th Congress. This time even more Democrats voted against an inquiry – 137 up from 121 in the previous Congress.

    After this third rejection to pursue impeachment, Rep. Lance Gooden, R-Texas, introduced a resolution to dethrone Chairman Nadler from the House Judiciary Committee for pursuing impeachment proceedings after the House had voted explicitly not to move forward with impeachment.

    No wonder why Speaker Pelosi is reluctant to hold a fourth vote. It could fail again.”


  5. The impeachment parade has been good for one thing.

    Trump and RNC donations. 🙂


    “RNC raises record-setting $27.3 million in September, amid impeachment push”

    “The Republican National Committee raised a record-setting $27.3 million in September and had $59.2 million cash on hand last month amid the impeachment push against President Trump — which has fueled GOP campaign contributions heading into the 2020 election.

    The RNC’s September fundraising haul is the best off-cycle month in the history of both the Republican and Democratic parties. This cycle, to date, the RNC has more than doubled the Democratic National Committee’s fundraising efforts, according to the GOP, which also noted that the Democrats, as of last month, carried $7.3 million in debt.

    “While Democrats focus on fighting President Trump, Republicans have prioritized voters and we have another record-breaking fundraising month—the highest ever off-cycle—to show for it,” RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel told Fox News. “Voters are tired of Democrats’ petty politics and baseless witch hunts, and their shameful attacks have only energized our grassroots army and allowed us to lay the groundwork for Republicans to take back the House, expand our majority in the Senate and re-elect President Trump in 2020.”

    The announcement comes just days after the RNC and the Trump re-election campaign announced a massive third-quarter war chest of $125.7 million.”


    Thanks Dems and NTers!

    You built that! 🙂


  6. Beto’s war on religious liberty. And let’s face it, this is an across the board thing with Democrats.

    The choice is really easy folks.


    “Having sworn himself to be a mortal enemy of the Second Amendment, pledging to go door-to-door to confiscate the AR-15s law-abiding citizens possess to protect their homes and family, Peter Francis O’Rourke now sets his sights on the First Amendment by announcing at a CNN townhall event on LGBTQ policies, a “church tax” on those religious entities who believe, based on their religious faith, that homosexuality is a sin and, based on their originalist interpretation of the U.S. Constitution, that gay marriage is not a constitutional right. As reported on The Blaze:

    O’Rourke affirmed that he would strip churches and other organizations of their tax-exempt status if they refused to support the LGBT cause by opposing same-sex marriage.

    CNN’s Don Lemon asked O’Rourke how far the government should punish organizations for following traditional religious beliefs about marriage.

    “This is from your LGBTQ plan, and here’s what you write, here’s a quote, ‘Freedom of religion is a fundamental right but it should not be used to discriminate,'” Lemon said.

    “Do you think religious institutions, like colleges, churches, charities, should they lose their tax-exempt status if they oppose same-sex marriage?” Lemon asked.

    “Yes,” O’Rourke said simply to a loud applause from the LGBTQ audience.

    “There can be no reward, no benefit, no tax break for any one or any institution, any organization in America that denies the full human rights and the full civil rights of every single one of us,” O’Rourke added.

    Apparently, in Beto’s mind being entitled to hold one’s own religious beliefs is not a basic human right, unlike killing the unborn up until the moment of birth. Tolerance in the alternate universe of the liberal elite is a one-way street. But they don’t want tolerance. They want acceptance. Never mind that the First Amendment says Congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise of religion. Never mind the touted separation of church and state. Beto would place the jackboot of government oppression on the throat of religious liberty. His “church tax” is intended to dry up contributions to churches, religious institutions, even their charitable efforts. He wants us to believe the Constitution was written to protect lifestyles, not liberties.”


  7. More on the Syrian cease fire.


    “Pence Announces Ceasefire Deal With Erdogan to End Turkey’s Syria Offensive”

    “U.S. Vice President Mike Pence said on Thursday he had reached a deal with Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan for a ceasefire in northern Syria to end an eight-day-old Turkish offensive against Kurdish-led forces.

    Speaking after crisis talks with Erdogan in Ankara, Pence said that under the deal all military operations would be paused to allow a pullback of Kurdish YPG militia over a 120-hour period. The Turkish military operation would end once that withdrawal was complete, Pence told a news conference.

    “Today the United States and Turkey have agreed to a ceasefire in Syria,” Pence told a news conference after more than four hours of talks at the presidential palace in Ankara.

    “The Turkish side will pause Operation Peace Spring in order to allow for the withdrawal of YPG forces from the safe zone for 120 hours,” Pence said. “All military operations under Operation Peace Spring will be paused, and Operation Peace Spring will be halted entirely on completion of the withdrawal.”

    Pence said U.S. forces in the region had already begun to facilitate a safe disengagement of YPG units.

    The deal struck with Erdogan also provided for Turkey not to engage in military operations in the flashpoint Syrian border town of Kobani.

    Pence said the United States and Turkey had committed to a peaceful resolution of Ankara’s demand for a “safe zone” in northern Syria near Turkey’s border, one of the objectives of the Turkish offensive.

    Pence added that he had spoken to U.S. President Donald Trump after the talks and that Trump had expressed his gratitude for the ceasefire accord.

    The deal was a major contribution to relations between NATO allies Turkey and the United States, which have become strained in recent months.

    After Pence and Erdogan met at the presidential palace, talks between Turkish and U.S. delegations continued for over four hours – well past their expected duration.”


  8. Here’s more on why the first story matters, and why some should be nervous.


    “Why It Matters That Sidney Powell Wants Data From Joseph Mifsud’s Smartphones

    While Sidney Powell’s latest motion barely comprised two pages, the implications are multi-pronged and monumental.”

    “On Tuesday, attorney Sidney Powell struck again, revealing yet another huge development in the Spygate saga between the lines of her latest motion. That motion, filed in the still-pending criminal case against Trump’s former national security advisor, Michael Flynn, demanded exculpatory evidence from federal prosecutors.

    But unlike her previously filed motion to compel, here Powell seeks evidence “that has only recently come into its possession.” And the evidence sought? The data and metadata from two Blackberry devices used by Joseph Mifsud.

    While Powell’s latest motion barely equaled two pages, the implications are multi-pronged and monumental.

    That the U.S. government has only recently obtained possession of a pair of smartphones used by Joseph Mifsud tells us two things: that Attorney General William Barr and U.S. Attorney John Durham’s probe into the origins of the Russia-collusion hoax is both serious and successful, and that the Crossfire Hurricane targeting of President Trump and former special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation were neither.

    After all, Mifsud was the man whose tip to young Trump volunteer advisor George Papadopoulos, that the Russians had dirt on Hillary Clinton, supposedly formed the basis for the FBI to launch Crossfire Hurricane’s targeting of the Trump campaign in late July 2016. Yet no one bothered to interview Mifsud until six months later, when he traveled to D.C. to speak at a conference sponsored by the State Department.

    And then the FBI let him go, later blaming Papadopoulos for their inability to properly question the purported Russian agent. Mueller seemed equally uninterested in Mifsud—a strange position to take toward a putative enemy agent.

    In contrast, Barr and Durham seemingly considered Mifsud key to understanding the Russia-collusion investigation. At least their reported trip last month to Italy suggested as much, with the Washington Post repeating the news that while there, “Barr and U.S. Attorney John Durham were played a taped deposition from when Mifsud reportedly applied for police protection.”

    The timing of the Italy trip, Powell’s motion, and her assertion that the government only recently came into possession of Mifsud’s two smartphones, all suggest Barr and Durham returned stateside with the evidence—something a serious investigation into potential Russia collusion back in 2016 would have already looked at.

    It would be an impossibility for our government to cordially obtain Mifsud’s smartphones if he were truly a Russian agent. If he were, he’d not hand over his smartphones to the United States or allow the Italian government to do so.

    Powell’s revelation that the government has Mifsud’s two Blackberries goes deeper, too: It connects to the shocker Powell shared in a previous court filing—that Mifsud attended the Russia Today dinner in Moscow on December 17, 2015, where Flynn was photographed with Vladimir Putin. That dinner marks a second connection between Trump campaign folks and Mifsud, with Papadopoulos as the other.

    In her motion, Powell suggests Mifsud had been tasked against Flynn, seeking, along with other agents, to arrange “—unbeknownst to him—‘connections’ with certain Russians that they would then use against him in their false claims.” But Powell is handicapped in making this argument, because the prosecution refused to turn over much of the evidence she seeks to defend her client.”


  9. Congress Just Begging for Another Quagmire War


    “I’ve been hesitant to comment on the U.S. troop withdrawal from northern Syria until now because I was conflicted.

    Like many Americans, I support President Trump’s stated goal of extricating us from foreign entanglements as much as possible, and especially removing ground forces from harm’s way when they have no definable mission other than waiting to see if anyone shoots at them.

    On the other hand, I have been sympathetic to the Kurds, who have helped us to restore peace in Iraq and to defeat ISIS in Syria. Moreover, I am no fan of Turkey and its Islamist autocrat, Recep Erdogan.

    So when Erdogan announced his intention to invade northern Syria in order to establish a zone to which Syrian refugees could be repatriated, my first instinct was “Hell, no.”

    But wait a minute. Turkey is a NATO member. Were we prepared to go to war with an ally to defend this strip of land held by the Kurds? Even if the Turks had an ulterior motive of seeking to punish their traditional enemy, the Kurds, were we willing to sacrifice American lives to take sides in that conflict?

    Also, how exactly do we distinguish between the U.S. invading Syria several years earlier for our “national interest” and what the Turks are doing now for their own perceived “national interest”?

    Certainly, we do not always go to war to protect people from invasion. As an example, we did not go to war with Israel when it invaded Lebanon in 1982. Many more such examples could be provided.

    But then there are the Kurds…

    We don’t want them to become the victims of genocide the way the Armenians were at the hands of the Turks in the last century, but what kind of commitment can Americans make to police Syria into the foreseeable future? Are we supposed to keep our soldiers at risk forever to prevent war between enemies who have irreconcilable differences?

    Wow! No wonder I didn’t want to weigh in. Add to that the questionable decision of the U.S. to throw its support behind the effort to overthrow Bashar al-Assad in Syria since 2011, and the well-known neocon support for military intervention as the solution of first resort in every case, and you can start to see the conundrum that confronted President Trump when faced with the prospect of drawing a new red line in northern Syria and daring Turkey to cross it.

    President Trump defended himself Wednesday during a joint press conference with the prime minister of Italy, and explained that he had made a decision that was aligned with his long-stated policy position and which he believed would save American lives:

    “When I ran, I ran on a basis we’re going to bring our great soldiers back home where they belong. We don’t have to fight these endless wars. … I want to bring our soldiers back home. We’re not a police force. We’re a fighting force. We’re the greatest fighting force ever. We have a great modern military, but that doesn’t mean we’re going to waste it. It doesn’t mean we’re going to deplete it like we did before with these crazy endless wars. … We’re 7,000 miles away. I campaigned on bringing our soldiers back home and that’s what I’m doing.”

    Imagine if John Kennedy had done that in Vietnam, as many historians believe he was on the verge of doing when he was assassinated. More than 50,000 American lives saved. Imagine if George W. Bush had withdrawn from Iraq after accomplishing our stated goal of forcing the collapse of the Saddam Hussein government and establishing that there were no weapons of mass destruction. More than 4,000 American lives saved. Imagine if Barack Obama had withdrawn from Afghanistan as he said he would do. Another 1,200 or more American lives saved. Not to mention the hundreds of thousands of native lives lost in those conflicts as a result of American presidents wielding American power overseas.

    Yet when President Trump announced he was pulling back a few dozen soldiers in Syria, the amnesiac Washington establishment rose up almost in unison to condemn him for not standing firm against Turkey, as if heightening tensions in the short term would somehow provide a long-term solution that did not inevitably lead to U.S. forces engaged in yet another ground war in Asia.

    Are any of those high and mighty senators willing to start World War III to support the Kurds? Turkey is supposed to be a crucial ally. Are we willing to push them toward Russia or China instead? Let’s not forget that Russia is already in Syria and Iran is in Syria. Let’s not forget that Israel has a vested interest in the outcome of any shooting war in the region. Let’s also not forget that Saudi Arabia is already on the brink of war with Iran. And let’s not forget how treaties and national interests and hot blood led to the carnage of World War I.

    Let’s not go that way again.”

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Someone at the FEC really should be looking into this.


    “AOC’s Campaign Paid $200K to Firm Established by Justice Democrats Cofounder

    Middle Seat Consulting highest paid vendor by AOC’s committee this year”

    “Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s (D., N.Y.) campaign committee dished out more than $200,000 during the third quarter to Middle Seat Consulting, a firm established by a cofounder of Justice Democrats, the far-left group that propelled the freshman Democrat into office.

    Ocasio-Cortez’s campaign hauled in $1.4 million in contributions and reported $924,349.64 in operating expenditures between July 1 and Sept. 30, its filings show. Middle Seat Consulting, a firm that “supports campaigns, organizations, and causes fighting for racial justice, climate action, immigrant rights, intersectional feminism, economic justice, and more,” was paid $210,364.37 by the freshman representative’s committee during this time for email fundraising, digital ad commission, list rentals, and strategy. The disbursements are a major increase from the combined $89,000 it gave to Middle Seat during the first and second quarters. Ocasio-Cortez’s committee has now cut the group checks totaling $300,000 this year. Middle Seat is the campaign’s highest paid vendor.

    Middle Seat’s leadership includes the same cast of characters as several other Ocasio-Cortez-linked PACs and groups, including those that have come under scrutiny by watchdogs.

    Middle Seat was cofounded in 2017 by Zack Exley, a former senior adviser for Bernie Sanders’s 2016 presidential campaign. Exley is one of four cofounders of Justice Democrats alongside fellow Sanders campaign alum Saikat Chakrabarti, who acted as Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff before departing from her office in August to work at New Consensus, a group pushing the Green New Deal that was also cofounded by Exley.

    Hector Sigala and Kenneth Pennington, both of whom worked with Exley and Chakrabarti on the Sanders campaign, are listed as governors of Middle Seat in D.C. records.

    Prior to Ocasio-Cortez’s campaign, Middle Seat also received payments from the Justice Democrats PAC. During the first half of the year, the PAC paid $205,151 to the firm for fundraising consulting. This amount was $185,000 more than its next highest paid vendor, We Also Walk Dogs, and is on pace to topple the $300,0000 the Justice Democrats PAC paid to Middle Seat throughout the entirety of the 2018 midterm election cycle.

    Natalie Trent, the operations manager of Justice Democrats who is listed as the treasurer of its PAC, appears to be the wife of Corbin Trent, Ocasio-Cortez’s former D.C. communications director. Corbin Trent departed Ocasio-Cortez’s congressional office around the same time as Chakrabarti to work on the representative’s 2020 campaign. He collected overlapping salary payments over a two-month span during the 2018 midterm election cycle from both the Justice Democrats PAC and Ocasio-Cortez’s campaign.

    The Justice Democrats PAC has been labeled a “slush fund” by watchdogs for the lucrative payments it made to companies established by Chakrabarti.”


  11. The neutering of all things manly by woke millenials continues.


    “Really? Men’s Magazine GQ Introduces New Insane Issue Undermining Masculinity”

    “Style mag GQ is trying to usher in the next wave of gender queer apparel and cosmetic choices, giving readers a full spread about how masculinity isn’t that important and the concept of a man is pretty much just a fugazi anyway. It’s just that … you’re a men’s magazine, guys.

    The outlet published an October 15 article breaking down traditional concepts of manhood, taking great pains to detail just how authoritarian capitalist society has manipulated us sheeple with this odious social construct. Oh, we are in for a treat!

    It’s all part of GQ’s “New Masculinity Issue,” which goes to show that if there was ever one priority in the work of a male-oriented magazine, it’s about rhetorically castrating your entire target demographic. GQ’s testicle-shriveling piece consisted of quotes about how “masculinity is morphing and modernizing” from “18 influential people,” some of whom are women. Sounds convincing, especially when the piece comes coupled with a photo of an obvious female with nail polish wearing a man’s plaid suit. Yeah, GQ has betrayed its readers.

    The woman is actually “non-binary” actor Asia Kate Dillon who has “made headlines for playing Hollywood’s first gender-nonbinary charracters.” According to GQ her pronouns are they/theirs and “they” has a lot to say. It’s not Dillion who’s misunderstanding, it’s all of us.

    Take this gem of a quote: “For one person, masculinity might mean a dress and a face of makeup, because that’s how they see themselves.” “They” also believes that “they” has every right to speak out against gender norms, because they oppressed Dillon when “they” was born.

    Dillon told the magazine: “As someone who was assigned female at birth, I was already a marginalized person, and then on top of that I’m queer and nonbinary and trans. So I have several marginalized identities.” Oh, really? But she clarified that she does have some privilege, “white-bodied privilege,” to be exact. This means that when she’s in a room of “queer people of color” she has to listen to their complaints, not the other way around.”


    The stupid……. it hurts….. 🤔😒

    Liked by 1 person

  12. A strange political season we are in.

    And as Noonan points out, “we live in the age of the unexpected.” Things are very fluid. There’s a sense that anything could happen. There are no sure outcomes on either side.


    The Impeachment Needle May Soon Move
    The mood has shifted against Trump, but the House has to show good faith and seriousness.

    By Peggy Noonan
    Oct. 17, 2019 6:44 pm ET

    Things are more fluid than they seem. That’s my impression of Washington right now. There’s something quiet going on, a mood shift.

    Impeachment of course will happen. The House will support whatever charges are ultimately introduced because most Democrats think the president is not fully sane and at least somewhat criminal. Also they’re Democrats and he’s a Republican. The charges will involve some level of foreign-policy malfeasance.

    The ultimate outcome depends on the Senate. It takes 67 votes to convict. Republicans control the Senate 53-47, and it is unlikely 20 of them will agree to remove a president of their own party. An acquittal is likely but not fated, because we live in the age of the unexpected.

    Here are three reasons to think the situation is more fluid than we realize.

    First, the president, confident of acquittal, has chosen this moment to let his inner crazy flourish daily and dramatically—the fights and meltdowns, the insults, the Erdogan letter. … It is possible he doesn’t appreciate the jeopardy he’s in with impeachment bearing down; it is possible he knows and what behavioral discipline he has is wearing down.

    The second is that the Republican leader of the Senate, Mitch McConnell, told his caucus this week to be prepared for a trial that will go six days a week and could last six to eight weeks. …

    … The third reason is the number of foreign-policy professionals who are not ducking testimony in the House but plan to testify or have already. …

    … Again, everything depends on the quality and seriousness of the House hearings. Polling on impeachment has been fairly consistent, with Gallup reporting Thursday 52% supporting the president’s impeachment and removal.

    Serious and dramatic hearings would move the needle on public opinion, tripping it into seriously negative territory for the president.

    And if the needle moves, the Senate will move in the same direction.

    But the subject matter will probably have to be bigger than the Ukraine phone call …

    … More important will be a text or subtext of serious and consistent foreign-policy malfeasance that the public comes to believe is an actual threat to national security. Something they experience as alarming. …

    … And the hearings had better start to come across as an honest, good-faith effort in which Republican members of Congress are treated squarely and in line with previous protocols and traditions.

    With all that the needle moves. Without it, it does not.


  13. Honest, good faith effort?

    Yeah, no…..


    “Breaking: Impeachment Witness Says He Tried To Warn About Ukraine Influence — With Biden”

    “Impeachment, as it turns out, cuts any number of ways. In their attempt to prove that Donald Trump tried to strongarm Ukraine into digging up dirt on Joe Biden, House Democrats dug some up on their own. The Washington Post reports that a career State Department officer tried to warn officials in the Obama administration about the conflict of interest that Hunter Biden’s work created in Ukraine and with efforts to target corruption. When those warnings reached the Vice President’s office in early 2015, Biden’s team shut them down:

    A career State Department official overseeing Ukraine policy told congressional investigators this week that he had raised concerns in early 2015 about then-Vice President Joe Biden’s son serving on the board of a Ukrainian energy company but was turned away by a Biden staffer, according to three people familiar with the testimony.

    George Kent, a deputy assistant secretary of state, testified Tuesday that he worried that Hunter Biden’s position at the firm Burisma Holdings would complicate efforts by U.S. diplomats to convey to Ukrainian officials the importance of avoiding conflicts of interest, said the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of confidentiality rules surrounding the deposition.

    Kent said he had concerns that Ukrainian officials would view Hunter Biden as a conduit for currying influence with his father, said the people. But when Kent raised the issue with Biden’s office, he was told the then-vice president didn’t have the “bandwidth” to deal with the issue involving his son as his other son, Beau, was battling cancer, said the people familiar with his testimony.

    The timing on this is very instructive. Supposedly Biden didn’t have the “bandwidth” in early 2015 to deal with the problem, but by late 2015 Biden was all over it — by his own admission. Last year, Biden bragged to the Council of Foreign Relations about how he’d used the leverage of a billion dollars in US aid in December 2015 to get then-Ukraine president Petro Poroshenko to fire his general prosecutor, over Biden’s dissatisfaction with progress in anti-corruption probes:”


    “In other words, Kent got pushed aside because no one cared at the time about quid pro quos and the appearance of impropriety. Just three years earlier, Biden’s boss had gotten caught on camera and a live mic asking Dmitri Medvedev to back off on contentious issues until after his 2012 election, when he would have “more flexibility” to meet the Russian positions. Medvedev had then helpfully offered to transmit that request to Putin. In 2015, leverage and quid pro quos were apparently all the rage.

    House Democrats stepped onto a land mine with Kent. They may step a little more carefully after this, but it raises questions about what kind of witnesses Senate Republicans might call when the trial begins after impeachment — or maybe if after this. George Kent’s little bombshell should have Nancy Pelosi reconsidering whether the alea has truly been iacta’d, and just how much she’s willing to expose the previous administration’s own peccadilloes in their fervor to get revenge over the 2016 election.”


  14. Not even running yet, but boy she’s got her excuses “why we lost” script ready, just in case.


  15. I hope he’s not serious and just wants to thumb Dems in the eye, and that he really plans to change this.


    “President Trump is 100% right to note that Hunter Biden profited massively off his father’s high government position: Even if none of it was ever illegal, it’s still wrong.

    So why can’t the president see the problem with having next June’s G-7 summit at the Trump National in Doral, Florida?

    It doesn’t matter if the resort only charges cost, as acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney vowed Thursday — or if it’s “by far and away the best physical location.” It’s still wrong.

    Even if the place is absolutely perfect — so good that it will have other world leaders backing Washington’s position on everything — it’s still the president’s resort.

    Fine: Trump is rightly proud of what he built in his earlier career. But he has a new job now — and a public trust.”


  16. DJ,

    A few issues I have with Noonan’s piece.

    “Serious and dramatic hearings would move the needle on public opinion, tripping it into seriously negative territory for the president.”

    Let me know when that starts. Because what is happening now is neither serious or dramatic.


    And Noonan knows how easily manipulated polls are. They’re worthless.


    And we have yet to even hear of any crime committed by Trump. That’s kinda necessary in all of this, no?

    I mean unless you’re a Dem or NTer, then Orange Man Bad is sufficient.


  17. Noonan should take note…..


    Liked by 1 person

  18. If only more people would….



  19. Miles to go and lots of unknowns still, AJ, I think that’s all she’s saying — all payout out also amid what is a very volatile political atmosphere. No predictions are probably the safest territory for anyone at the moment. The partisans are hard-core on the issues, but most voters lie in that murky middle. And I suspect many are growing weary and losing patience with the Washington melodrama. The could wind up declaring a pox on all their houses.

    In another month, we’ll (maybe?) see more clearly. He’ll likely survive a vote to remove him from office (but that’s not a hard-and-fast prediction as I really still believe anything can happen at this juncture). And how that all impacts 2020 is yet to be determined.

    If the Democrats had anyone even close to being a sensible moderate, the Republicans would be in serious trouble.


  20. Uh-oh,

    Cat fight! 🙂

    Tulsi has responded to Hillary. She pulled no punches. 🙂


    Liked by 1 person

  21. Like

  22. And now you know why they were lost/discraded/deleted/insert excuse here.

    And a side note, this is why corrupt Comey should be in prison for dereliction of duty. He orchestrated her exoneration and immunity for her corrupt cronies. He’s corrupt, like Clinton.


    “State Department Concludes Clinton Email Review, Says It Found Nearly 600 Security Violations”

    “State Department investigators probing Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server as secretary of state discovered nearly 600 security incidents that violated agency policy, according to a report the Daily Caller News Foundation obtained.

    The investigation, conducted by the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security, found 38 individuals were culpable for 91 security violations. Another 497 violations were found, but no individuals were found culpable in those incidents.”

    “The investigation concluded Sept. 6, and the report was issued Sept. 13.

    The investigation sought to determine if the exchange of emails on Clinton’s server “represented failure to properly safeguard classified information” and whether any individuals at State were culpable for any of the failures.

    Clinton exchanged more than 60,000 emails on a private email account hosted on a server that she kept at her residence in New York. She emailed frequently with longtime aides Huma Abedin, Cheryl Mills, Jake Sullivan, and an outside adviser, Sidney Blumenthal.

    The FBI investigated whether Clinton mishandled classified information by using the server. Former FBI Director James Comey announced July 5, 2016, that he would not be recommending charges against Clinton over the server, though he did say she was “extremely careless” in using an off-the-books email system.”


    A disgusting miscarriage of justice.


  23. Like I said, not serious, not honest, and not in good faith.

    It’s a joke.




  24. ———–


  25. Well that didn’t take long. 🙂



  26. ———–


  27. AJ – You know that reference to the “cat fight” between Tulsi Gabbard and Hillary Clinton was a bit sexist, don’t ya? There are plenty of similar tweets or remarks that male politicians make about one another.

    I’m not really a feminist, but as a woman, I do notice certain things.


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.