FAKE NEWS MEDIA – Rand Paul DEMANDS for the Fake News Media to Publish Identity of Deep State ‘Whistleblower’

Paul appeared with President Trump at a rally in Kentucky on Monday night.

By Shane Trejo – 11/5/2019

President Donald Trump appeared in Kentucky on Monday night to promote the re-election campaign of Gov. Matt Bevin, the staunchly conservative Republican who faces tough Democratic opposition in Tuesday’s off-year election.

During the rally, President Trump briefly handed the podium to Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), who has emerged as Trump’s top ally on foreign affairs in Washington D.C. Paul talked about the latest witch hunt against the President and the new drive toward impeachment based upon his phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Paul made adamant his belief that the whistleblower’s identity must be known, and challenged the fake news to actually do their jobs and expose his identity as well as his extensive ties to Democratic Party officials to the public.

“We also now know the name of the whistleblower. The whistleblower needs to come forward as a material witness because he worked for Joe Biden at the same time Hunter Biden was getting money from corrupt oligarchs,” Paul said at the Kentucky rally on Monday night.

“I say tonight to the media, do your job and print his name,” Paul said to the crowd as they erupted with cheers.

An attorney for the whistleblower claims that Paul is “betray[ing] the interests of the Constitution and the American people” for demanding accountability.

“A member of Congress who calls for the identity of any lawful whistleblower to be publicly revealed against their wishes disgraces the office they hold and betrays the interests of the Constitution and the American people,” attorney Mark Zaid told The Hill.

However, it has been revealed that the whistleblower is being given legal representation by lawyers with deep connections to Democratic Party leaders.

Zaid’s partner, Andrew Bakaj, worked for Sens. Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton before he began representing the whistleblower:

Former CIA official Andrew Bakaj, who once worked at Hillary Clinton’s office while she was a Senator, is representing the whistle-blower who filed a complaint against President Donald Trump’s dealings with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky…

Bakaj was influential in crafting regulations regarding whistle-blowers while serving in the administration of former President Barack Obama

He started his career working under influential former Democratic lawmakers. Bakaj served as an intern for the late former Sen. Daniel Moynihan (D-NY), then as an intern under Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), and then he worked under Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY).

Curiously, Bakaj also interned at the US Embassy in the Ukraine, showing that he has ties to the country that is under the microscope right now for President Trump’s reported communication with their leader about Joe Biden’s dealings.

Considering the whistleblower had prior contact with the office of Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) before filing his complaint and reportedly worked to dig up dirt on President Trump while working for the Obama administration, Paul’s calls for transparency are more than justified. The whistleblower’s name must be revealed, and he must testify under oath, or the rule of law is dead.

 

Pelosi Says House To Vote Thursday On Impeachment Inquiry

See the source image

By Tyler Durden

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced on Monday that a vote will be held this Thursday “that affirms the ongoing, existing investigation that is currently being conducted by our committees” as part of the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry, according to the Washington Post.

House Rules Committee Chairman Jim McGovern (D-MA) said the vote would “ensure transparency and provide a clear path forward” as their investigations continue.

The resolution will authorize the disclosure of deposition transcripts as well as set forth due process rights for President Trump, according to Pelosi. It will also establish a procedure for open hearings.

Pelosi sent the following letter to House Democrats (emphasis ours):

Dear Democratic Colleague,
For weeks, the President, his Counsel in the White House, and his allies in Congress have made the baseless claim that the House of Representatives’ impeachment inquiry “lacks the necessary authorization for a valid impeachment proceeding.” They argue that, because the House has not taken a vote, they may simply pretend the impeachment inquiry does not exist.
Of course, this argument has no merit. The Constitution provides that the House of Representatives “shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.” Multiple past impeachments have gone forward without any authorizing resolutions. Just last week, a federal court confirmed that the House is not required to hold a vote and that imposing such a requirement would be “an impermissible intrusion on the House’s constitutional authority.” More than 300 legal scholars have also refuted this argument, concluding that “the Constitution does not mandate the process for impeachment and there is no constitutional requirement that the House of Representatives authorize an impeachment inquiry before one begins.
The Trump Administration has made up this argument — apparently out of whole cloth — in order to justify its unprecedented cover-up, withhold key documents from multiple federal agencies, prevent critical witnesses from cooperating, and defy duly authorized subpoenas.
This week, we will bring a resolution to the Floor that affirms the ongoing, existing investigation that is currently being conducted by our committees as part of this impeachment inquiry, including all requests for documents, subpoenas for records and testimony, and any other investigative steps previously taken or to be taken as part of this investigation.
This resolution establishes the procedure for hearings that are open to the American people, authorizes the disclosure of deposition transcripts, outlines procedures to transfer evidence to the Judiciary Committee as it considers potential articles of impeachment, and sets forth due process rights for the President and his Counsel.
We are taking this step to eliminate any doubt as to whether the Trump Administration may withhold documents, prevent witness testimony, disregard duly authorized subpoenas, or continue obstructing the House of Representatives.
Nobody is above the law.
CAP
CAP

The announcement comes after former deputy national security adviser Charles Kupperman – who served as a deputy to former national security adviser John Bolton – filed a Friday lawsuit seeking guidance from a federal judge as to whether he should follow the advice of the executive branch, which has instructed him not to attend, or Congress, according to the Post.

As the judge has yet to rule on his request, Kupperman declined to appear.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.), meanwhile, said that a former deputy national security adviser had “no basis in law” to skip a deposition Monday and that his failure to appear was further evidence of Trump’s efforts to obstruct Congress. –Washington Post

Kupperman was on the line when President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky held a July 25 discussion in which Trump requested investigations into Democratic rival Joe Biden, as well as allegations of Ukrainian election meddling in 2016 to benefit Hillary Clinton.

Better ISIS than Trump? WaPo, Hollywood, Nats fans show self-defeating toxicity of US politics

American media, celebrities and coastal elites are so far gone in their obsession with President Donald Trump, they are willing to praise Islamic State terrorists so long as they don’t have to side with their president.

Much of America greeted Trump’s announcement that US forces had tracked down and killed Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) “caliph” Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi with joy and pride. What country would not rejoice in the demise of a leader of terrorists, head-choppers, rapists and murderers? Apparently, not the America of the mainstream media, Hollywood celebrities, and even many Washington, DC residents – all of whom simply could not resist to bash Trump instead.

WaPo blasted with #WaPoDeathNotices memes for dubbing ISIS leader ‘austere religious scholar’ in head-scratching headline

BAGDADI

The Washington Post been rightly mocked for describing Baghdadi as an “austere religious scholar” in a headline, but their other stories spinning his death as anything but a win for Trump flew largely under the radar. That doesn’t mean other mainstream outlets covered themselves with glory. Apparently hating the very idea of giving Trump credit, they looked far and wide to find something, anything, they could hold against him.

One such thing was that he did not keep senior congressional Democrats in the loop about the operation. How dare he! They’re only trampling law and precedent in trying to impeach him on fabricated charges, no big deal.

Then there was this gem from National Public Radio, which chose to lead with Trump getting impeached and focused on “dramatic and incendiary language.” Oh, and by the way, Baghdadi died.

CAP

Objecting to Trump’s mannerisms over the substance of his actions has long been a thing with the mainstream media, but this time it led to some truly bizarre reactions. Just like the time when Democrats and the media sided with the notorious MS-13 gang, just because Trump called them “animals,” they now objected to Trump’s description of Baghdadi’s death because they read it as somehow offensive to dogs.

‘Halloween’ star Jamie Lee Curtis, for example, tweeted that “ALL living things suffer when they are blown up,” and that dogs are “brave, bold, loyal, loving and healing, not that Trump would understand.

Trump’s “he died like a dog” may have gone right over the heads of American liberals, but it was perfectly clear in the Muslim world, for which it was intended. Islam considers dogs unclean, and describing Al-Baghdadi that way diminished any claim to religious legitimacy he made as an “austere scholar.”

Which brings us back around to the Post. Attempting to somehow excuse the headline, editor Kristine Kelly tweeted it “should have never read that way” – getting an epic ratio in the process from a public that just wasn’t buying it.

CAP

That’s because the Post reportedly got it right the first time – calling Al-Baghdadi the “Islamic State’s terrorist-in-chief” – and then inexplicably changed that headline to the controversial one, for reasons unknown.

Confused celebrities, Resistance activists and political reporters all work and live in areas that overwhelmingly voted against Trump in 2016. A great example is the crowd at the Nationals Stadium in Washington, DC – which that booed Trump when he made an appearance at Sunday’s World Series game.

The rest of America – the heartland Trump voters – saw a stadium filled with coastal liberals booing their president as he was doing the victory lap after killing Al-Baghdadi, and getting their karmic comeuppance when the Nats lost to the Houston Astros.

Sure, that had more to do with their star pitcher’s injury than with Trump, but this is America, where narrative trumps facts, every time. One would think the Trump-haters would have got that message by now. Appears not.

Nebojsa Malic,

COMPILATION: MEDIA, DEMOCRATS BASH TRUMP OVER KILLING OF ISIS LEADER

Compilation: Media, Democrats Bash Trump Over Killing of ISIS Leader

Establishment hates Trump so much they can’t even acknowledge obvious win for America

10/28/2019

The mainstream media and even some Democrats couldn’t bring themselves to praise President Trump over his decision to raid and kill the infamous ISIS founder Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

Instead, they deployed every form of spin and criticism they could muster in attempt to make Trump look bad for vanquishing the world’s most wanted man.

Here are a few examples:

Some pundits lamented that killing ISIS members only reinforces their murderous ideology.

CBS News Senior National Security contributor Mike Morell said he was “bothered” by Trump detailing Baghdadi’s death because it “inspires extremists.”
Vox editor Aaron Rupar lambasted Trump for saying that witnessing the raid against Baghdadi was like “watching a movie.”
A CNN correspondent compared Trump’s language about Baghdadi to ISIS’s hateful rhetoric.
Obama officials like his Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff criticized Trump for “piling on” the humiliation of ISIS’s defeat.
Obama’s former National Security Adviser Susan Rice said the successful raid was not “mission accomplished.”

A CNN panel condemned Trump’s “irresponsible” remarks about Baghdadi “dying like a dog.”

Fox News’ Chris Wallace harped on Vice President Mike Pence for not briefing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on the special operations raid.

CAP

2020 Democrat presidential candidate Bernie Sanders refused to congratulate Trump or the U.S. forces who conducted the raid, instead giving credit to the Kurds in Syria.

“Saturday Night Live” couldn’t even help digging into Trump over his dovish Syria policy, saying he’s “Making ISIS Great Aagain”…the same night al-Baghdadi was killed.

CAP

Fortunately, some journalists, like Glenn Greenwald, recognized the media’s shameful behavior and called them out on it.

CAP

Obama Admin Cleared Hunter for Ukraine Gig Despite Warnings State Dep’t Fear Veep’s Son ’conduit for currying influence’

CAP

By Edwin Mora

The Obama administration dismissed warnings raised by top State Department official George Kent in 2015 that the Ukrainian company that was employing then-Vice President Joe Biden’s son Hunter at the time was corrupt, the Washington Post confirmed Thursday.

The Post’s report suggested the Obama administration allowed Hunter Biden to continue serving on Burisma Holdings’ board of directors although it knew the company was corrupt.

Echoing a report from NBC News issued earlier this week, the Post noted:

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 Washington Post has previously reported that there had been discussions among Biden’s advisers about whether his son’s Ukraine work would be perceived as a conflict of interest, and that one former adviser had been concerned enough to mention it to Biden, though the conversation was brief.

Kent’s comments came during his closed-door deposition in the House Democrats’ impeachment probe on Tuesday.

When Kent raised his concerns about Burisma, the Obama administration had already cleared Hunter to serve on the company’s board of directors. Hunter joined Burisma’s board of directors in 2014. The former vice president was leading U.S. efforts to crack down on corruption at the time.

The State official explicitly warned the Obama administration that Burisma was “corrupt,” NBC News revealed near the end of its article on Kent’s testimony, noting:

During his nearly 10 hours of testimony, Kent also told members of Congress and their staff that Burisma, the energy company where Hunter Biden was a board member, was corrupt, according to a separate person who was present in the room. Kent said he told the Obama administration in 2016 that they should not hold an event with Burisma because of the company’s extensive corruption in Ukraine.

In the July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that triggered the impeachment probe, Trump urged his counterpart to investigate corruption allegations against Biden and his son Hunter.

As vice president, Biden threatened to withhold aid to Ukraine to force the Eastern European country to fire its top prosecutor in 2016, who had investigated the owner of Burisma, Mykola Zlochevsky, for possible corruption.

Hunter had been serving on the board of Burisma for up to $83,000 per month at the time despite having no background in energy, prompting allegations of corruption. He admitted to ABC News last weekend that his father’s political position helped him secure the lucrative appointment to Burisma’s board of directors.

A “whistleblower” allegation that during the July 25 call Trump attempted to pressure Ukraine into investigating the Bidens by withholding aid triggered the impeachment probe. Trump and Ukraine have denied the allegations.

The Democrats’ impeachment probe is primarily seeking to determine whether Trump withheld aid to Ukraine in a bid to get dirt on White House hopeful Biden. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), the leader of the probe, has said, however, that there does not need to be a quid pro quo to impeach Trump.

 

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑