Published on Apr 3, 2019
{THE SWAMP} – US Chamber of Commerce Opposes Border Shutdown, Supports ‘New NAFTA Agreement’ to End Tariffs
The Chamber is using its lobbying power to stifle President Trump’s ‘America First’ agenda with great effectiveness.
By Shane Trejo
The US Chamber of Commerce is not happy about President Donald Trump’s threats to close down the US southern border, and the organization is using its tremendous lobbying power to curtail Trump on immigration and trade issues.
“Even threatening to close the border to legitimate commerce and travel creates a degree of economic uncertainty that risks compromising the very gains in growth and productivity that policies of the Trump administration have helped achieve,” said Neil Bradley, the Chamber’s executive vice president and chief policy officer.
Thomas Donahue, CEO for the US Chamber of Commerce, appeared on CNBC yesterday where he attempted to downplay his organization’s opposition to the President’s agenda. Still, he expressed some concerns with Trump’s tough talk on Mexico.
“We don’t want to shut down the people that come to the United States everyday to work here across the border that we need. We don’t want to shut down the trade,” Donahue said.
Although Donahue admitted that the migrant crisis at the border is substantial and that “the house is full,” the Chamber is still lobbying President Trump to moderate his trade and immigration policies.
“I think we have conveyed to the President some of the issues he should be thinking about,” Donahue said.
Donahue hopes that Trump’s strong rhetoric on the border is mostly to garner attention and not a serious public policy proposal. He also wants Trump’s trade war with China to conclude as quickly as possible.
“I am not in all of the trade issues enamored with tariffs because, as you know, they’re all paid for by American companies,” Donahue said, in direct opposition to Trump’s trade policy.
“You buy a million dollars worth of steel somewhere that has a tariff on it, you send a check for a quarter of a million dollars to the US government,” Donahue said, deriding the effect of Trump’s policies.
Additionally, Donahue hopes that Congress will pass a “new NAFTA agreement” so Trump’s tariffs can be brought to an end.
The Chamber, along with Koch Industries and other globalist lobbying interests, have driven the pro-trade, open immigration status quo of the Republican Party for decades. Donahue’s comments make it clear that the Chamber’s agenda has not changed in the Trump era.
“Immigrants have long been a vital part of our economy, and they can help fill those gaps now…. Our nation must continue to attract and welcome the world’s most industrious and innovative people and finally fix our broken immigration system,” Donahue said last year.
“The United States is fundamentally out of people,” Donohue said.
The lobbying push by the Chamber toward Trump to persuade him to abandon his electoral mandate seems to be working as Trump’s rhetoric on immigration has shifted drastically in recent months.
Organizations like the Chamber are never going to make it easy to repel globalism from the Republican Party.
DEMS SUBPOENA MUELLER REPORT WHAT IS BARR HIDING?
By Emily Tillett
The House Judiciary Committee voted to authorize subpoenas for special counsel Robert Mueller’s full report on his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and potential ties between the Russian government and the Trump campaign. The resolution passed Wednesday morning 24-17 in a party line vote. The committee will now also move to subpoena all underlying documents related to Mueller’s findings.
Before Wednesday’s vote, Republicans largely blasted the Democratic-led effort as violating the law, claiming the public release of the full Mueller report would present national security issues as much of the report is expected to contain redacted materials pertaining to grand jury information.
Republican members on the committee also claimed the resolution was a continuing effort to undermine the Trump presidency, with some claiming Democrats were pursuing the subpoenas as an attack on the president.
“As much as Democrats may hate the president, I would hope you love America more,” said Colorado Republican Rep. Ken Buck. He said that “if love trumps hate” Democrats should afford the attorney general enough time to properly release the findings.
Meanwhile, as Democrats continue to push for transparency, President Trump pushed back, calling out committee Chairman Jerry Nadler for opposing the release of independent counsel Ken Starr’s report on the investigation of former President Clinton.
“With the NO COLLUSION Mueller Report, which the Dems hate, he wants it all. NOTHING WILL EVER SATISFY THEM!” tweeted Mr. Trump on Tuesday.
Committee spokesman Daniel Schwarz said in a statement on Tuesday that the debate in 1998 “was not about Congress receiving evidence” but rather about “what type of material from the underlying evidence in the Starr report should be made public.”
“Our expectation is that Attorney General Barr will be as forthcoming now as Mr. Starr was in 1998,” added Schwarz, saying Barr “should provide the full Mueller report to Congress, with the underlying materials, at which point we will be in a better position to understand what Special Counsel Mueller uncovered during his investigation.”
The House already overwhelmingly voted 420-0 on a non-binding resolution to release the full Mueller report, but Sen. Lindsey Graham blocked a vote on the resolution in the Senate.
As a result of the resolution, Nadler’s committee will also issue subpoenas for a variety of Trump associates. They include former White House Counsel Donald McGahn, former White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon, former White House Communications Director Hope Hicks, former Chief of Staff Reince Priebus and former White House Counsel Chief of Staff Ann Donaldson.
They are being subpoenaed as part of the Judiciary Committee’s separate investigation into possible threats to the rule of law by the president.
“Because we may have to go to court to obtain the complete text of the Special Counsel’s report, and because the President may attempt to invoke executive privilege to withhold that evidence from us, it is imperative that the Committee take possession of these documents, and others, without delay,” explained Nadler.
Highlights from the Judiciary Committee vote below:
Nadler pushes for report release
Speaking before Wednesday’s vote, Nadler said in opening remarks that on multiple occasions, he asked Barr “to work with us to go to the court and obtain access to materials.” Nadler claimed however that Barr has “so far refused.”
“I will give him time to change his mind. But if we cannot reach an accommodation, then we will have no choice but to issue subpoenas for these materials. And if the Department still refuses, then it should be up to a judge—not the President or his political appointee—to decide whether or not it is appropriate for the Committee to review the complete record,” said Nadler.
Republicans blast committee probe
Ranking Member Rep. Doug Collins, R-Georgia, meanwhile slammed the committee’s ongoing probe of the president and investigation, saying time would best be spent on issues like the crisis on the Southern border. Collins said the asks for further documents was “reckless, irresponsible and disingenuous.”
“What’s the rush? Spring break probably, we don’t want to wait until May,” Collins suggested of Nadler’s calls for subpoenas as Barr has vowed to testify before lawmakers in early May. He claimed Democrats were simply calling for the subpoenas of documents to make headlines after Mueller didn’t make a determination as to whether Mr. Trump committed obstruction of justice.
“This is great political theater,” he added, arguing that asking Barr to release any grand jury materials was illegal, citing potential national security issues.
Rep. Ken Buck of Colorado echoed Collins, saying the public release could “comprise intelligence sources and methods” that Barr previously expressed concerns about this to the committee.
“As much as Democrats may hate the president, I would hope you love America more,” said Buck. He said that “if love trumps hate” Democrats should afford the attorney general enough time to properly release the findings.
Rep. John Ratcliffe of Texas meanwhile urged a subpoena of Robert Mueller himself, saying the committee should let Mueller speak about “whether or not he thinks the report he created should be disclosed without considerations of redactions of classified information.”
Fellow Texan Louie Gohmert blasted Democrats claiming they were the ones who colluded with the Russian government. He called the ongoing probe an “outrageous assault on the office of the president even after the truth has come out.”
“It’s time to go back and clean up the mess that’s been made,” added Gohmert.
Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida agreed with Gohmert, saying Democrats are in denial over Muller’s report, saying the report’s initial release is the the “death rattle of the Democrats’ Russian collusion lie.” He said they’re going through the “stages of grief” in real time over Mueller’s less-than-fruitful findings into obstruction of justice and collusion.
CBS News’ Rebecca Kaplan contributed to this report.
Pelosi: Biden’s Unwanted Touching Doesn’t Disqualify Him In Run For President
By Joseph Curl
It’s all cool, bro.
Former Vice President Joe Biden is getting a lot of headlines lately, and not exactly the kind you want to get when you’re thinking about running for president. He’s also earning a new nickname — Handsy Joe — for all his touchy-feeliness with women over the years.
But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a woman, doesn’t think the new allegations should prevent Biden from moving into the White House.
Asked on Monday if she thinks the claims from two women should prevent Biden from being president, Pelosi said: “No. No, I do not.”
“I don’t think that this disqualifies him from being president,” the California Democrat said. “Not at all.”
On Tuesday, though, she had some advice for Biden: No more touching.
“Join the straight-arm club,” Pelosi told a breakfast hour Washington event on Tuesday, the Associated Press reported.
“Just pretend you have a cold and I have a cold,” Pelosi said.
Pelosi, D-Calif., told the event, which was sponsored by Politico, that Biden “has to understand that in the world we are in now people’s space is important to them and what’s important is how they receive it, not necessarily how you intended it.”
Democrats have a huge tolerance for misogynist men — as long as they’re Democrats. Liberals fiercely defended then President Bill Clinton after he had an affair with a White House intern his daughter’s age and lied under oath about it, saying the whole story was “just about sex.” Clinton’s alleged sexual promiscuity was long reported, including affairs with lounge singers and accusations that he raped or sexually accosted at least three women.
Meanwhile, Democrats became enraged over allegations that Brett Kavanaugh, then a nominee for a seat on the Supreme Court, had supposedly once pushed girl onto a bed at a drunken high school party 35 years ago.
Last week, Lucy Flores, a former Nevada Democratic assemblywoman who was running for higher office, came out with allegations that Biden inappropriately touched her during a campaign rally in 2014, saying she felt uncomfortable and demeaned by his touching.
Then on Monday, another woman came forward with new allegations. Amy Lappos told the Hartford Courant that “Biden touched her inappropriately and rubbed noses with her during a 2009 political fundraiser in Greenwich when he was vice president.”
“It wasn’t sexual, but he did grab me by the head,” Amy Lappos told The Courant. “He put his hand around my neck and pulled me in to rub noses with me. When he was pulling me in, I thought he was going to kiss me on the mouth.”
And she said Biden crossed the line. “There’s absolutely a line of decency. There’s a line of respect. Crossing that line is not grandfatherly. It’s not cultural. It’s not affection. It’s sexism or misogyny.”
Biden’s fellow Democrats, especially the ones who are already running for president, have let him twist in the wind — or pounced on the allegations outright.
“I believe Lucy Flores,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts said in Iowa on Sunday. “And Joe Biden needs to give an answer.”
When Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont was asked if Flores’ allegation disqualifies Biden from running for president, he said: “That’s a decision for the vice president to make.”
Former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper, also a 2020 candidate, said Biden’s actions were cause for concern. “Certainly, I think it’s very disconcerting and I think that women have to be heard and we should start by believing them.” And another candidate, Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota said she has “no reason not to believe” Flores.
“I think we know from campaigns and politics that people raise issues and they have to address them, and that’s what he will have to do with the voters if he gets into the race,” she said on Sunday.
2017 JUSSIE SMOLLETT MUSIC VIDEO FEATURED A FAKE TRUMP, A NOOSE AND ‘ALTERNATIVE FACTS’
Smollett’s video, titled “F.U.W.” for “F**ked Up World,” explored themes of perceived racial bias and human rights abuses from Dakota Access Pipeline and Standing Rock to the water crisis in Flint, Michigan
“Empire” actor Jussie Smollett released a music video in 2017 that featured a fake President Donald Trump, a noose and the words “alternative facts.”
WATCH:
Smollett’s video, titled “F.U.W.” for “F**ked Up World,” explored themes of perceived racial bias and human rights abuses from Dakota Access Pipeline and Standing Rock to the water crisis in Flint, Michigan. (RELATED: Dueling Protests Over Jussie Smollett Case Rock Chicago)
The lyrics were clearly aimed at the fake Trump, who made an appearance early on:
Build a wall. You won’t keep us from loving each other.
Rewrite the law. You won’t keep us from loving each other.
Resist. Resist. Resist. Resist. Resist. Resist …
The actor, who claimed he was attacked in Chicago in late January, alleged that his attackers yelled, “This is MAGA country!” as they poured bleach on him and wrapped a noose around his neck. He later said on “Good Morning America” that he believed he had been targeted because of his activism “against 45.”
Police offered a different story, however, saying instead that there was evidence indicating that Smollett had possibly staged the attack himself. Investigators detailed a timeline of events and a series of communications between Smollett and the two Nigerian brothers who admitted to attacking him — but said that he had directed them to do so.
The charges against Smollett were dropped last week after he forfeited his $10,000 bond and agreed to do community service, but many were quick to voice displeasure with the decision. Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel went so far as to call it “a whitewashing of justice.”
#MeToo founder Alyssa Milano defends ‘creepy’ Joe Biden from harassment allegations
Actress, #MeToo advocate, and all round woke feminist Alyssa MIlano has stepped in to defend her “friend” Joe Biden, after accusations of inappropriate touching and groping have mounted against the former vice president.
“I am proud to call Joe Biden a friend. He has been a leader and a champion on fighting violence against women,”Milano tweeted on Monday, adding “that’s who Joe Biden is – a warm, generous individual who believes its on all of us to pay attention to women’s stories and experiences.”
As vice president, Biden spearheaded the ‘It’s On Us’ campaign against sexual assault on college campuses. However, the 76-year-old has also built up quite the highlight reel of his own inappropriate moments; becoming far too familiar and handsy with women and children at Washington events.
Most recently, Biden was accused of unwanted kissing by former Nevada legislator Lucy Flores, who said the former VP planted a “big slow kiss” on the back of her head at a rally in Las Vegas; and Connecticut woman Amy Lappos, who alleges Biden “put his hand around my neck and pulled me in to rub noses with me.”
Biden denies any wrongdoing, saying it was “never” his intention to make anyone feel uncomfortable. Milano, who reinvented herself in recent years as a vocal feminist and founder of the #MeToo movement, agrees.
“I respect Lucy Flores’ decision to share her story and agree with Biden that we all must pay attention to it,” she tweeted. “But, just as we must believe women that decide to come forward, we cannot assume all women’s experiences are the same.”
“Believe women, but…” is certainly a change of tune for Milano, who led the crusade against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, last year. Milano said that his confirmation in the face of uncorroborated sexual assault allegations served to “institutionalize sexual violence,” and hashtagged her anti-Kavanaugh tweets“#BelieveWomen.”
Biden has not yet announced a run for the presidency in 2020, but is considered a likely candidate and a frontrunner among a crowded field of Democrats. Although progressive godfather Bernie Sanders remains a favorite among young voters, Biden topped a recent Quinnipiac University poll, with 29 percent of Democrats rating him as their first choice.
With Sanders dangerously close in the polls, a certain few journalists in the mainstream media have stepped in to downplay the accusations against Biden.
“Is is okay to bring up this could be politically motivated?” MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski asked on Monday. “Are we allowed to bring up that Lucy Flores is a huge Bernie person? And she has political connections that might be counter to Biden’s goals?”
Brzezinski then laughed off Biden’s wandering hands, describing her “friend” as “extremely affectionate, extremely flirtatious in a completely safe way.”
Still, others are more puzzled. Fox News host Tucker Carlson asked former Clinton Adviser Richard Goodstein “have you ever sniffed a stranger’s hair? What is that?” Even liberal late-night comedian Stephen Colbert piled on Biden. “Generally, the only people who come up from behind, put their arms around you, smell your hair and kiss your head are dead husbands teaching you pottery,” he jibed.
(NO, IT’S NOT AN APRIL FOOL’S JOKE.) – Facebook plans to curate ‘high quality’ news for its users from ‘trusted outlets’
Mark Zuckerberg is considering hiring human “editors” to hand-pick “high-quality news” to show Facebook users in an effort to combat fake news — and no, it’s not an April Fool’s joke.
In his ongoing quest to satisfy the political censorship demands of Western governments, Zuckerberg told German publishing house Axel Springer that he is considering the introduction of a dedicated news section for the social media platform, which would potentially use humans to curate the news from “broadly trusted” outlets. Zuckerberg said Facebook might also start paying news publishers to include their articles in this dedicated news section in an effort to reward “high-quality, trustworthy content.”
With social media censorship already at worryingly high levels, who will decide which outlets are “broadly trusted” and which are untrustworthy? What qualifies one outlet as more “trusted” than another? Will Zuckerberg make the criteria public?
Collective punishment? Zuckerberg’s call for internet regulation is aimed at competitors – analyst
Fresh from the anti-climactic Russiagate saga and long-awaited Mueller report, will Facebook penalize all the outlets that incessantly pushed the Trump/Russia “collusion” narrative and hyped fake “bombshells” for more than two years sans evidence, or will the likes of MSNBC and Rachel Maddow automatically earn “trusted” status? The answer to that question is blindingly obvious.
Facebook’s efforts to combat fake news are reminiscent of other recent efforts from apps like NewsGuard, the US government-linked app which “rates” news websites according to their “trustworthiness” and, unsurprisingly, targets alternative media sites which do not strictly adhere to establishment narratives. If recent history is any indicator, Facebook’s own efforts to rate news will also fall directly in line with US government objectives.
The social media giant has been rightly accused of blatant censorship on multiple occasions in recent memory — and there doesn’t seem a way that a group of Facebook-hired editors could be trusted to curate the news for anyone, unless it took some serious steps to address its various biases. In fact, even if it did that, isn’t hiring human editors with their own political biases and preferences to sift through all the available news and select the stories deemed fit for public consumption just an Orwellian idea in the first place?
Facebook should probably already be aware of the pitfalls when it comes to hiring human editors for such purposes. During the 2016 US presidential election, the company’s solution to political bias in its trending news section was to fire the human editors responsible for it. Maybe Zuckerberg thinks this time it will be different? Or maybe, and more likely, this is just another PR effort to placate the pro-censorship crowd on Capitol Hill.
There is no shortage of examples of Facebook censorship at this point. Last year, the platform inexplicably took down the English-language page belonging to left-leaning, Venezuela-based news network Telesur — and deleted the page belonging to Venezuela Analysis, another left-leaning outlet offering commentary critical of Washington’s foreign policy in Latin America. The pages were later restored, but Facebook was not forthcoming with an explanation.
Changes made to Facebook algorithms to combat “fake news” in 2017, saw traffic to multiple socialist and government accountability websites plummeting — including Police the Police (a page exposing US police brutality) and the Free Thought Project (which promotes government transparency). Alternative news websites like Truth-out.org, Democracy Now and Alternet also suffered as a result of those algorithm changes.
More recently, Facebook suspended popular pages run by Maffick Media, which is 51 percent owned by RT’s video agency Ruptly. Coincidentally, the content on those pages is also highly critical of the US government. Funnily enough, Facebook isn’t often caught censoring popular pages whose content is Washington-friendly. The Maffick pages were later restored, but Facebook forced them to include more explicit information about their funding, which in itself is no big deal, but it is a requirement curiously not demanded of US government-funded or linked pages.
ALSO ON RT.COMZuckerberg asks governments for more internet regulation in self-flagellation exercise
Not only has Facebook been accused of censorship, however, it has also been found to be working at the behest of certain governments — but again, only Washington-friendly ones, of course.
The Intercept reported last year that Facebook met with Israeli government officials and complied with orders to delete the accounts belonging to certain Palestinian activists. Facebook quickly bowed to Israel’s demands after threats that it would be forced into complying with the deletion orders by law if it failed to do so voluntarily.
But things don’t look to be getting any better on the Facebook censorship front since then. A journalist for Israeli news outlet +972 Magazine tweeted on Monday that Facebook was now punishing news sites (in the form of lower views) for publishing content that “could be a negative experience” for users — whatever that means. The content in question was an article by the magazine about Gaza’s Great Return march and the casualties inflicted on protesters by the Israeli army.
With such a terrible track record when it comes to political bias and willingness to censor news and information, don’t be surprised if Facebook’s planned “dedicated news section” of “high-quality” information turns out to be a failure.
Danielle Ryan
Big League Politics Editor Patrick Howley: Obama and Brennan’s Crime of the Century Included Coercing A Supreme Court Justice
By
Big League Politics Editor-in-Chief Patrick Howley joined host Matt Locke on the syndicated Conservative Cartel radio show (12-3 PM on Mojo 5-0 Radio) to discuss his landmark piece on the “Crime of the Century” carried out by Barack Obama and Deep State conspirators against President Donald Trump.
It turns out the Russia Collusion Hoax even included the attempted coercion of a Supreme Court justice by two Obama administration intel officials.
READ THE FULL REPORT: HOW OBAMA, HILLARY, AND BRENNAN CARRIED OUT THE CRIME OF THE CENTURY
Tom's Blog 