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

‘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.

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?

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…”

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

TUCKER RESPONDS TO BRIAN WILLIAMS FACT-CHECKING GRAHAM: ‘PLEASE, GET SOME SELF-AWARENESS’

Tucker Responds To Brian Williams Fact-Checking Graham: ‘Please, Get Some Self-Awareness’

“Just another fact-check from a guy suspended for lying.”

By Phillip Stucky

Fox News host Tucker Carlson responded to MSNBC’s Brian Williams’ decision to fact-check Republican South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham’s speech during Attorney General William Barr’s Wednesday hearing on Capitol Hill.

“MSNBC, if you were watching, you may have noticed, could not contain its excitement during the Attorney General’s testimony. During the hearing, Sen. Lindsey Graham noted quite correctly that Mueller’s report found no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Brian Williams wouldn’t have it, they cut in to call Graham a liar,” Carlson began. (RELATED: Trump Lawyer Reads Directly From Mueller Report To Push Back Against Brian Williams)

“Just another fact-check from a guy suspended for lying. Nice guy, but please get some self-awareness. That wasn’t the only time something like that happened though today, an hour later they cut away again to say that Barr was a big fat liar, too,” he continued.

The Hill’s Joe Concha agreed, “Conforming to the hive, Tucker. Look, I’m a Jersey guy, he grew up down the New Jersey river, he is a nice guy by all accounts. The environment that he is in, he realizes that he has to give his audience comfort food, what they want to hear at this point.”

“And the scary part about that is that he could just pivot into being what he’s become now, which is completely and totally partisan,” Concha concluded. “Remember, he was the anchor, the NBC Nightly News for many many years. And he’s gone the full Dan Rather I would say. These guys were people that you trusted because there they are, CBS and NBC giving you the news and now instead they’ve gone completely and totally from one side to the left and they’ve destroyed legacies in the process, unfortunately.”

The segment came after Williams cut into both Graham’s and Barr’s testimony during Wednesday’s hearings to say that they were lying about the facts in the Mueller report.

“We’re reluctant to do this, we rarely do,” Williams said about interrupting the broadcast of the hearing. “The chairman of the Judiciary Committee just said that Mueller found there was no collusion. That is not correct.”

Graham asserted that Mueller reported no collusion occurred between President Donald Trump’s campaign and Russia, something Williams apparently disagreed with.

It wasn’t the first time Williams called Barr’s statements into question. In April, the MSNBC host called Barr “Baghdad Bill Barr,” a reference to an Iraqi Defense Minister known as “Baghdad Bob” who misstated Iraqi victories under Saddam Hussein.

“It’s already been mentioned around here — it would hearken back to a conflict decades ago — we would not be surprised if some headline writer somewhere came up somewhere with ‘Baghdad Bill Barr’ for what we saw today,” Williams claimed at the time.

Williams spent a great deal of time defending himself against claims of lying about his past when it came to light there were several stories that he reported on that were either complete fakes or greatly embellished.

‘Still salty about losing’: Twitter users stunned by Hillary calling for China to hack Trump

Screen Shot 2019-05-02 at 10.44.22 AM

Hillary Clinton appeared on TV proposing China illegally hack into President Donald Trump’s tax returns, prompting Twitter users to question both her ability to move on from her presidential election defeat, and her sanity.

Clinton made the call on MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow show Wednesday night, suggesting Democratic 2020 presidential candidates should seek out the help of the “only other adversary of ours, who’s anywhere near as good as the Russians” to hack Trump’s tax returns.

Ignoring the outcome of the Mueller Report and doubling down on her years of unfounded accusations that Russia colluded with election rival Donald Trump, Clinton said: “Since Russia is clearly backing Republicans, why don’t we ask China to back us?”

“And not only that, China, if you’re listening, why don’t you get Trump’s tax returns?” Clinton continued, echoing comments by Trump in Florida during the 2016 campaign in which he asked if Russia might find Clinton’s deleted emails, but did not outright call for her to be hacked.

Screen Shot 2019-05-02 at 10.48.12 AM

READ MORE: ‘Mind-bendingly bizarre’: Barr hearing shows ‘Russiagate’ still has hold on US politics

The fact that Clinton is still peddling a three-year-old ‘Russiagate’ conspiracy theory after it was debunked by the Mueller report, and calling for a foreign power to hack the US president, did not go unnoticed by Twitter commenters, including Kim Dotcom, who called the former secretary of state “salty.”

Screen Shot 2019-05-02 at 10.51.18 AM.png

Screen Shot 2019-05-02 at 10.52.00 AM

It appears Hillary was toeing the Clinton family line, as the comments come days after her husband and former US President Bill Clinton questioned how it would be received if a Democratic presidential candidate asked China to hack opponents during the 2020 election.

Screen Shot 2019-05-02 at 10.53.01 AM

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑