Tag: CLINTON FOUNDATION

Pelosi: We Cannot ‘Accept’ a Second Term for Donald Trump

By Pam Key

Tuesday at an event in New York City hosted by Cornell University’s Institute of Politics & Global Affairs, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said Democrats could not “accept a second term for President Donald Trump.”

Pelosi said, “We have to make sure — this will sound political but we have to make sure that the Constitution wins the next presidential election. We can’t be worrying about well, how long is this going to take? Well, that will take as long as it does. And we will press the case so that in the court of public opinion people will know what is right. But we cannot accept a second term for Donald Trump if we are going to be faithful to our democracy and to the Constitution of the United States.”

She added, “And that is just the fact. So we have to operate on many fronts. We have to operate in the Congress, in the courts, and in the court of public opinion, and we must win the next election.”
0

Democratic Congressman Admits Impeaching Trump Is All About 2020

See the source image

By JOSH HAMMER

The Daily Wire has covered the ongoing impeachment obsession of congressman Rep. Al Green (D-TX) numerous times before.

In December 2017, The Daily Wire reported that Green “brought dead-on-arrival articles of impeachment against Trump” to the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives. At the time, the House voted overwhelmingly against Green’s attempt to commence impeachment.

In May 2018, The Daily Wire reported that Green changed his tune, instead vowing to commence impeachment proceedings after Democrats regained the House. Per The Daily Wire’s Emily Zanotti:

“There’s a good likelihood there will be articles of impeachment” brought against the President, Rep. Green said. “Here is a point that I think is salient, and one that ought to be referenced. Every member of the House is accorded the opportunity to bring up impeachment. This is not something the Constitution has bestowed upon leadership. It’s something every member has the right and privilege of doing.”

Green’s impeachment advocacy has indeed continued unimpeded since his party took over House leadership. In March 2019, Green discussed his continued efforts with C-Span:

Since then, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and House Democratic leadership has actually forsworn impeachment — as has the chairwoman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

But this past weekend, Green seemed to let the cat out of the bag when it comes to his own impeachment motives. On MSNBC on Saturday, Green conceded that his impeachment efforts are a transparent ploy to help defeat Trump in 2020.

Here is the relevant portion of the underlying exchange, per RealClearPolitics:

MSNBC HOST: You have been calling for starting articles of impeachment since 2017, but a new Quinnipiac poll taken after the release of the redacted Mueller report said 66% say Congress should not start impeachment proceedings, there’s a sharp partisan divide, with only 4% of Republicans favoring impeachment. Are you afraid this talk will help the president’s re-election?

REP. AL GREEN: I’m concerned that if we don’t impeach this president, he will get re-elected. If we don’t impeach him, he will say he’s been vindicated. He will say the Democrats had an overwhelming majority in the House and didn’t take up impeachment. He will say we have a constitutional duty to do it if it was there and we didn’t. He will say he’s been vindicated.

The Washington Free Beacon noted more of the intense exchange: “‘We must impeach this president. If we don’t, it’s not the soul of the nation that will be at risk only, it is the soul of the Congress that’s at risk. Congress has a duty, a responsibility and obligation that only it can fulfill. No one else can. No other entity can. It is Congress that will have to act,’ [Green] said. ‘If we allow political expediency to trump moral imperative, we will have created a shameful situation of this Congress that will never live down, history won’t be kind to us. We must impeach him.'”

But going forward, no matter how many times Democrats try to impeach the president, it seems that their true motive for attempting to do so has now been revealed to the public.

WATCH:

 

0

(THE FBI IS PART OF THE DEEP STATE) – WRAY SAYS HE WOULDN’T USE ‘SPYING’ TERM TO DESCRIBE FBI SURVEILLANCE

CAP

By Chuck Ross

FBI Director Christopher Wray told senators Tuesday he would not use the term “spying” to describe the bureau’s surveillance activities, including those used against the Trump campaign.

“Well that’s not the term I would use,” Wray said in a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing when asked whether the FBI carries out “spying” during its various investigations.

Wray’s remarks are a contradiction of sorts of Attorney General William Barr’s congressional testimony that he believes government agencies spied on the Trump campaign. (RELATED: Barr: ‘I Think Spying Did Occur’ Against Trump Campaign)

“I think spying did occur,” Barr told the House Appropriations Committee on April 10.

While Wray distanced himself from Barr’s remarks, he offered a diplomatic response when asked about the use of the “spying” term.

“Lots of people have different colloquial phrases,” Wray said.

“I believe that the FBI is engaged in investigative activity and part of investigative activity includes surveillance activity of different shapes and sizes. And to me the key question is making sure that it’s done by the book consistent with our lawful authorities.”

Wray said he was not personally aware of any evidence the FBI illegally surveilled the Trump campaign.

The FBI relied on the unverified Steele dossier to obtain Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrants against former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.

An FBI informant, Stefan Halper, also made contact during the campaign with Page and two other Trump aides, George Papadopoulos and Sam Clovis. Halper was accompanied on his outreach to Papadopoulos by a government investigators working under the alias Azra Turk. It remains unclear if Turk was working for the FBI or another government agency, such as the CIA.

The Justice Department’s inspector general is investigating the matter. Barr testified that he formed a task force within the Justice Department to investigate the origins of the Russia probe. Wray said he has been in close contact with Barr regarding the investigation.

0

UNEQUIVOCALLY AND ABSOLUTELY WITHOUT A DOUBT – OBAMA KNEW ABOUT SPYING AND WAS IN ON IT

CAP

by Jim Hoft May 7, 2019

We now know without a doubt the former President Barack Obama was in on the Deep State’s actions to spy on President Trump and entrap his team members.  We don’t know how much spying and attempts of entrapment went on, but we do know Obama was aware of it all.

Democrats and Deep State dirty cops have claimed for months that there was no spying on the Trump campaign.  Now we know without a doubt that there was not only spying, but the dirty cops in the Deep State attempted to entrap Trump team members through this spying.  We also know without a doubt that Obama was in on it.

We know Obama was in on it based on numerous pieces of information. 

For starters we know that Obama spied on numerous people for years while he was President.  Obama took the US Intelligence community and corrupted it.  He used the US intelligence apparatus to spy on anyone and everyone and especially his enemies.  We put a list of the many individuals and entities Obama spied on that we know of here.

We also know that Hillary’s long lost emails were found in the White House.  This was reported by Judicial Watch in April 2019 –

Conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch announced that Bill Priestap, former Assistant Director of the FBI Counterintelligence Division admitted, in writing and under oath, that the FBI found Hillary Clinton’s emails in the Obama White House — specifically the Executive Office of the President!

The FBI also admitted that almost 49,000 Hillary Clinton emails were reviewed as a result of a search warrant for emails found on Anthony Weiner’s laptop.

We know that Susan Rice, Obama’s former National Security Advisor, left a email on the last day that she and Obama were in office that confirms Obama was in on it.  Senators Grassley and Graham sent a letter to Rice asking about this email –

Ambassador Rice appears to have used this email to document a January 5, 2017 Oval Office meeting between President Obama, former FBI Director James Comey and former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates regarding Russian interference in the 2016 Presidential election.  In particular, Ambassador Rice wrote:

“President Obama began the conversation by stressing his continued commitment to ensuring that every aspect of this issue is handled by the Intelligence and law enforcement communities ‘by the book’.  The President stressed that he is not asking about, initiating or instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective.  He reiterated that our law enforcement team needs to proceed as it normally would by the book.” 

Rice and Obama must have felt guilty about their crimes because they sent this email in an attempt to cover up their illegal actions.  Unfortunately, nobody is buying it.
We also know that Obama, in essence, told incoming President-elect Trump in the Oval office that he was involved in the Deep State coup.  Obama did this inadvertently by advising Trump not to hire General Michael Flynn.

President Obama warned Donald Trump against hiring Michael Flynn as national security adviser in the days after the 2016 election, according to three former Obama administration officials.

The warning came during an Oval Office meeting between Obama and Trump after the Republican’s victory. Flynn had been fired by the Obama administration as the head of the military’s intelligence branch.

This was plastered all over the media in May 2017 a few days before the Mueller Special Investigation was put into place by Rod Rosenstein.  Obama had to know about the coup in order to make this recommendation to Trump months earlier but the media only thought about using this to discredit both Trump and Flynn.  Now its coming back to haunt Obama.

In March 2019 Deep State coup participant James Clapper said to CNN’s Anderson Cooper –

One point I’d like to make, Anderson, that I don’t think has come up very much before, and I’m alluding now to the President’s [Trump’s] criticism of President Obama for all that he did or didn’t do before he left office with respect to the Russian meddling. If it weren’t for President Obama, we might not have done the intelligence community assessment that we did that set off a whole sequence of events which are still unfolding today, notably, special counsel Mueller’s investigation.

President Obama is responsible for that, and it was he who tasked us to do that intelligence community assessment in the first place. I think it’s an important point when it comes to critiquing President Obama.

 

Finally, if Clapper hasn’t said enough, former US Attorney Joe DiGenova was on the radio yesterday and he said point blank says that Obama knew about it all –

Obama was in on it.  It was a sham.  The Mueller investigation was a sham.  Obama spied on the opposition party.

 

0

‘Still too much’: Clintons’ speaking tour prices slashed, available for less than $14

CAP

Demand for tickets to Bill and Hillary Clinton’s speaking tour has been so sluggish that organizers have had to slash prices to get bums on seats. It’s almost as if they’re a spent political force that no one wants to listen to.

You may not have heard, but the the former president and the twice-failed presidential candidate have been touring North America speaking to audiences about their careers and “where we go from here.”

The promotional material for ‘An Evening With The Clintons’ promises “a one-of-a-kind conversation with two individuals who have helped shape our world and had a front seat to some of the most important moments in modern history.”

ALSO ON RT.COM‘Still salty about losing’: Twitter users stunned by Hillary calling for China to hack TrumpHowever, it seems that the public doesn’t have much interest in hearing what the Clintons have to say. Mercifully, Sunday’s event in Las Vegas is the final show before the tour finally wraps up.

Tickets can be purchased for less than $14. Saturday evening’s show in Los Angeles saw prices drop as low as $6, while tickets for Friday’s event in Seattle could be picked up for $20. It’s a far cry from when Hillary used to reportedly command $275,000 to make speeches to Wall Street firms.

Even these bargain-basement prices are far too steep for many on social media, however, as people seem perplexed by the fact that anyone is willing to pay any amount of money to see the Clintons.

CAP

CAP

CAP

Those who did go to any of the events may well have been left disappointed as the couple have largely steered clear of mentioning US President Donald Trump.

However, Hillary did throw some red meat to the crowd at the Seattle engagement. “I really believe that we are in a crisis, a constitutional crisis,” she told the audience, the Seattle Times reports.

“We are in a crisis of confidence and a crisis over the rule of law and the institutions that have weathered a lot of problems over so many years. And it is something that, regardless of where you stand in the political spectrum, should give real heartburn to everybody. Because this is a test for our country.”

0

Pelosi fears Trump may borrow page from Democratic playbook by challenging 2020 election legitimacy

CAP

Speaker Nancy Pelosi has warned her fellow Democrats that Donald Trump may question the legitimacy of the 2020 election if he loses by a slim margin – a cowardly political tactic not seen since the Democrats lost in 2016.

In an interview with the New York Times, the house speaker and de facto head of the Democratic Party envisioned a nightmare scenario in which Trump would attempt to “poison the public mind” instead of accepting a Democratic presidential victory in next year’s election.

CAP

According to Pelosi, the solution to this terrible conundrum is for the Democrats to abandon all ideas of impeachment and nominate a moderate who won’t rock the boat. Only then, Pelosi mused, will the Democrats be able to crush Trump by such a huge margin that he will never be able to fabricate salacious tales of foreign blackmail and be taken seriously.

Her pearl-clutching faced considerable scrutiny from the Twitterati, who pointed out that Pelosi’s party has spent the last two years questioning the legitimacy of the president, after Hillary Clinton refused to accept responsibility for her humiliating defeat in 2016.

ALSO ON RT.COMRussiagate-pushing Democrats call AG Barr’s ‘spying’ claim conspiracy theory

“This is rich. In 2016 Democrats said Trump would challenge the legitimacy of the election. Then they spent two years challenging the legitimacy of the election. Now, with 2020 approaching, Nancy Pelosi is trying the same thing again,” noted Washington Examiner political correspondent Byron York.

CAP

“How ironic given that Hillary & the Dems still haven’t accepted the 2016 results,” a like-minded netizen observed.

CAP

Others wondered exactly how Trump would attempt to stay in power even if he lost the 2020 election.

“Let’s just suppose Trump does lose in 2020, how does ANY INTELLIGENT person think Trump will be able to stay in POWER… will he push the desk up against one of the 4 doors blocking entrance to him,” one Twitter user commented.

CAP

Pelosi’s talking points also received plenty of love on social media, however. One of her supporters ominously predicted that Trump would contest the election “whether he wins or not.”

CAP

0

‘ANYONE EVER SEEN COCAINE?’: UNEARTHED VIDEO SHOWS BERNIE LECTURING YOUNG CHILDREN ABOUT DRUGS

‘Anyone Ever Seen Cocaine?’: Unearthed Video Shows Bernie Lecturing Young Children About Drugs

‘I’m only 5 years old,’ says child

Henry Rodgers | Daily Caller News Foundation – MAY 4, 2019

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, a 2020 presidential candidate, once asked a group of children if they had ever seen cocaine and if they smoked cigarettes when he was the mayor of Burlington, while talking to kids as a part of his old television show.

In an episode of Sanders’s show “Bernie Speaks with the Community,” which was created in the 1980s, he is sitting on top of a wooden picnic table with a microphone speaking with a group of children about a variety of issues, with a focus on drugs. Politico obtained footage of the show and released it Friday.

“Do any of the older kids you know have some problems with drugs?” Sanders asked the children. “Who wants to talk to me about that? What about drugs? Is that a problem?”

“I like coke!” one little boy said.

“Tell me about that,” Sanders asked.

“I like Coca-Cola!” the boy corrects himself.

“Oh, Coca-Cola. Alright, but who knows about cocaine?” Sanders continued.

“Anyone ever seen cocaine? Do any of the kids know people who use drugs like that?” Sanders asked. “You don’t have to tell me who, but I bet you do.”

A couple children at the table said they might have seen cocaine, and he cut them off.

“Hold it!” he said, later adding the drug “screws up your mind,” before changing the subject to cigarettes, asking the children, “Who here smokes?”

“Come on, raise your hand.”

“I don’t smoke because I’m a little kid,” a child sitting in someone’s lap responded. “I’m only 5 years old.”

Sanders is a front-runner in the 2020 presidential fight, with a crowded field of Democrats who hope to take on President Donald Trump. However, Sanders’s former press secretary decided to join former Vice President Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign for president, deciding to not work for her former boss.

Trump accused the Democratic National Committee of conspiring to oust Sanders from the 2020 Democratic primary in an April tweet.

0

Barr Launches Wide-Ranging Probe Into 2016 FBI Spying

By Tyler Durden

Attorney General William Barr told the Senate Judiciary Panel this week that he has assembled a team at the Justice Department to probe whether the spying conducted by the FBI against the Trump campaign in 2016 was improper, reports Bloomberg.

Barr suggested that he would focus on former senior leaders at the FBI and Justice Department.

“To the extent there was overreach, what we have to be concerned about is a few people at the top getting it into their heads that they know better than the American people,” said Barr.

Barr will also review whether the infamous Steele dossier – a collection of salacious and unverified claims against Donald Trump, assembled by a former British spy and paid for by the Clinton campaign – was fabricated by the Russian government to trick the FBI and other US agencies. (Will Barr investigate whether Steele made the whole thing up for his client, Fusion GPS?)

“We now know that he was being falsely accused,” Barr said of Trump. “We have to stop using the criminal justice process as a political weapon.”

Mueller’s report didn’t say there were false accusations against Trump. It said the evidence of cooperation between the campaign and Russia “was not sufficient to support criminal charges.” Investigators were unable to get a complete picture of the activities of some relevant people, the special counsel found.

Although Barr’s review has only begun, it’s helping to fuel a narrative long embraced by Trump and some of his Republican supporters: that the Russia investigation was politically motivated and concocted from false allegations in order to spy on Trump’s campaign and ultimately undermine his presidency. –Bloomberg

As Bloomberg notes, Barr’s review could receive a boost by a Thursday New York Times article acknowledging that the FBI sent a ‘honeypot’ spy to London in 2016 to pose as a research assistant and gather intelligence from Trump foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos over possible Trump campaign links to Russia.

The Trump re-election campaign immediately seized on the Times report as evidence that improper spying did occur. “As President Trump has said, it is high time to investigate the investigators,” said Trump campaign manager, Brad Parscale in a statement.

During Barr’s Wednesday testimony, Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) told Barr “It appears to me that the Obama administration, Justice Department and FBI decided to place their bets on Hillary Clinton and focus their efforts” when it came to investigating the Trump campaign.

Depending on what Barr finds, his review of the Russia probe could give Trump ammunition to defend himself in continuing congressional inquiries — and in a potential impeachment for obstructing justice. Barr told senators that Trump’s actions can’t be seen as obstruction if he was exercising his constitutional authority as president to put an end to an illegitimate investigation.

Barr’s efforts follow two years of work by a group of House Republicans who have been conducting dozens of interviews regarding the FBI’s and Justice Department’s conduct in the early stages of investigation of Trump and his campaign. –Bloomberg

On Thursday, Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) issued a criminal referral for Nellie Ohr – a former Fusion GPS contractor who passed anti-Trump research to her husband, then the #4 official at the DOJ. 

On Thursday, Meadows said that Barr’s “willingness to investigate the origins of the Russia investigation is the first step in putting the questionable practices of the past behind us,” and that the AG’s “tenacity is sure to be rewarded.”

The FBI opened its counterintelligence investigation against the Trump campaign after a self-professed member of the Clinton Foundation, Joseph Mifsud, fed Papadopoulos the rumor that Russia had “dirt” on Clinton. That rumor would be coaxed out of the former Trump aide by another Clinton-connected individual – Australian diplomat Alexander Downer, who would notify authorities of Papadopoulos’ admission, officially launching the investigation.

Barr says he wants to get to the bottom of it.

His review will examine the above chain of events that set the investigation into motion, and whether any US agencies were engaged in spying on or investigating the Trump campaign before the probe was officially launched.

Barr said he’s working with FBI Director Christopher Wray “to reconstruct exactly what went down.” He said he has “people in the department helping me review the activities over the summer of 2016.”

Notably, Barr said his aides will be “working very closely” with the Justice Department’s inspector general, Michael Horowitz.

Horowitz is conducting his own investigation into the origins of the Russia investigation and whether there were abuses when the FBI obtained a secret warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in October 2016 to spy on another foreign policy adviser to the campaign, Carter Page. –Bloomberg

Barr will also investigate when the DOJ and FBI knew that the Democratic Party and Clinton was Steele. 

More subterfuge, or is this really happening?

0

NYT Chief WH Correspondent: Here’s The Real Reason Obama Didn’t Address Russian Meddling In 2016

Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton

“…if I speak out more, he’ll just say it’s rigged…”

By JAMES BARRETT

In his recently updated and expanded book on former President Obama, “Obama: The Call Of History,” The New York Times’ Chief White House Correspondent Peter Baker addresses several hot-button topics, including why Obama failed to adequately address Russian meddling ahead of the 2016 election and his response to “buffoonish showman” Donald Trump shocking the world by defeating Hillary Clinton, a response that involved “multiple emotional stages.”

In one of the sections of the book highlighted by The Daily Mail Friday, Baker peels back the curtain on why Obama was so weak in his response to Russian meddling ahead of the election in 2016 — something for which Trump has hammered Obama amid all the Robert Mueller-debunked “collusion” allegations.
“Anything the Russians did concerning the 2016 Election was done while Obama was President. He was told about it and did nothing! Most importantly, the vote was not affected,” Trump tweeted last month.
Screen Shot 2019-05-03 at 11.01.00 AM

The reason Obama didn’t act more decisively and rebuke Russia more directly, says Baker is that he feared that it might “escalate” the Russian interference campaign. This cautious approach, Baker suggests, flows out of Obama’s “don’t do stupid sh**” foreign policy philosophy, an approach for which Obama has been criticized in the past.

But fearing the escalation of the campaign wasn’t the only reason Obama didn’t act more forcefully, says Baker: Obama reportedly once admitted that “if I speak out more, he’ll just say it’s rigged.”

According to Baker, in one meeting Obama — who was convinced like most of the political establishment that Clinton was going to win — said confidently that Russian President Vladimir Putin had “backed the wrong horse” by supposedly helping Trump’s campaign.

As the Daily Mail notes, it was only after the election, which Trump won in stunning fashion, that Obama finally took action against the Russians as punishment for the meddling his administration had known about for months. Obama’s decision to expel a bunch of Russian diplomats conveniently fed into the “collusion” narrative that had already gotten rolling and which the election’s loser, Clinton, helped promote.

The Daily Mail also draws attention to another juicy passage in the book which reveals new details about Obama’s response to Trump’s upset victory over the woman who was supposed to protect Obama’s legacy.

Accoring to Baker, Obama watched the Marvel film “Dr. Strange” on election night with Michelle and Valerie Jarrett. At one point, Baker writes, Obama received an update on his phone and said, “Huh. Results in Florida are looking kind of strange.”

While Michelle went to sleep early, Obama stayed up and witnessed Trump’s devastating defeat of Clinton, which Baker suggests Obama found unthinkable because he thought there was “no way Americans would turn on him.”

According to Baker, Obama phoned Clinton at 1 a.m. and advised her to concede quickly, advice she didn’t take. In response, she supposedly said, “I’m sorry for letting you down.”

Obama and his team, Baker says, did in fact feel that Clinton had let them down. “To Obama and his team … the real blame lay squarely with Clinton. She was the one who could not translate his strong record and healthy economy into a winning message.”

Related: BOMBSHELL: Ukraine Embassy Says DNC Operative Reached Out For Dirt On Trump In 2016, Report Says

0

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑