Published on May 7, 2019


By JOSH HAMMER
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.

By Chuck Ross
“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.

May 7, 2019
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.”
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 –

By Kyle Morris
During the interview, Rogers described a phone call between himself and Sen. Jones after he made the remarks on abortion.
“Everybody who knows me knows I’m combative,” Rogers stated. “And I told Doug that if you want to come out against me, I’m coming out here against you.”
Rogers then said Jones was “right” in his remarks, but he had to “come out against” him for political reasons.
“He called me twice. He told me, ‘John, I know you’re right but I have to come out against you,’” Rogers said as he described the phone call. “I said, ‘OK, fine, if it’s going to help your campaign, do that.’ That’s the kind of guy I am.”
Rogers said Jones called him back a second time and was “heated.”
“He called back and I didn’t know that somebody was trying to call me at the same time, you know sometimes lines get crossed up, and they heard Doug hollering and shouting. And they called me themselves, and I’ll tell you who it was: Frank Matthews.”
According to Yellowhammer News, Matthews is a “prominent social justice activist in Jefferson County and a longtime fixture in the area’s Democratic politics.”
“He said, ‘John, wasn’t that Doug Jones hollering at you?’ And I said, ‘Yes it was.’ I wasn’t going to tell him a lie,” Rogers stated. “I said I told Doug, ‘Doug, bye. I’m not ready to talk to you because you cannot apologize for me.’ I do my own apologies.”
Rogers affirmed that Jones was “heated” and then impersonated Jones’s remarks and behavior.
“‘John, John, John, be quiet — shut up. You’re killin’ me, you’re killin’ me,’” Rogers said. “He even said I don’t speak for Alabamians. I never said I spoke for Alabamians. I speak for my district.”
Rogers added, “You don’t chastise me, holler at me like that. He issued an apology for me. I told Doug Jones, I said, ‘bye.’ I’m not talking to you, we don’t have to talk anymore. Because I don’t appreciate that… you don’t chastise me… hollering and shouting because I’m hurting your re-election. It’s bigger than re-election, what I was talking about.”
“Doug Jones was a good friend of mine,” Rogers said in regards to the situation. “I said, ‘was.’ And that’s how I feel about it right now.”
LISTEN:



By
The ADL, once considered an admirable pro-Jewish organization that combated anti-Semitism, has turned into a partisan political censor facilitating Big Brother and trying to stifle President Donald Trump’s ‘America First’ agenda.
They admitted as much during a summit with the uber-globalist Council on Foreign Relations earlier this year where the organization’s leader bragged about enabling the tech giants’ push for extreme Draconian censorship.
“We work with Google on using AI to try and interrupt cyber-hate before it happens,” said Jonathan A. Greenblatt, Chief Executive Officer and National Director of the ADL, about his organization’s trailblazing work in the field of Orwellian pre-crime.
“We work with YouTube to get them to change their algorithms so it lessens the likelihood that a young person is going to run into some of these anti-Semitic conspiratorial videos,” he added.
Greenblatt brought up Facebook specifically and how the ADL enables the tech giant’s ability to manipulate information for the purposes of combating alleged hate. He deployed double-speak to justify his organization’s anti-constitutional push.
“So there are different ways [Facebook] can tweak their algorithms and adjust their products so they think not only about free speech… but protect the user’s right to not be harassed or hated,” he said.
He was particularly laudatory toward Facebook in how they were a front-runner in leading the charge toward Big Brother.
“They have done some good things to deal with very specific cases by taking swifter action when people perpetrate online bullying or online harassment,” Greenblatt said.
He feels that legislators should take further action in passing bills that would further destroy freedom of expression and other core liberties.
“There is a gap in the legal regime. There are techniques that extremists have used online to terrorize Jews and other people like doxing, and swatting and different forms of cyberbullying that are not covered by existing laws and need to be,” Greenblatt said.
He doesn’t seem particularly considered with left-wing terror groups like ANTIFA deploying these harmful tactics though. Democratic leaders like Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) do not seem to be on his organization’s radar. Instead, his focus is entirely on restricting the speech of conservative and right-wing voices.
Greenblatt concluded by saying that “the abuse online can be far, far worse than anything physical” and that “we need legislators to catch up and fill some of the gaps.”
While the fake news media likes to ballyhoo about the Rooskies, it is organizations like the ADL that pose the real threat to the integrity of our democracy.