Published on May 8, 2019
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton joins Lou Dobbs to discuss the current state of the FBI and the House Judiciary Committee’s attempt to hold Attorney General Barr in contempt for not appearing at a hearing.

Published on May 8, 2019


By Edwin Mora
NYT has itself in the past sided with several leftist leaders including Russia’s Joseph Stalinin lying about the Soviet genocide; with Cuba’s Fidel Castro in inflating the size of his guerrilla prior to the Cuban Revolution; and taking money for ads from socialist Nicolás Maduro’s regime.
The Trump administration has been considering labeling MB a terrorist group since soon after taking office in January 2017.
NYT has joined opposition to the move expressed by the likes of Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP), which leads the world in jailed journalists.
On Monday, the Times argued that designating the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization would “ignite a firestorm in the Middle East,” adding:
Government lawyers had warned that the Muslim Brotherhood did not meet the legal criteria to be designated a terrorist organization. And in a volatile region where American troops were already battling Islamist extremists, the three men believed, taking on the Brotherhood was one fight too many.
The newspaper goes on to note that Trump officials who opposed labeling MB a terror group – namely former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, former Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson, and Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, the president’s former national security adviser – are now gone.
Their departure has reportedly opened the door for “autocratic leaders” like Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi of Egypt to influence the U.S. to move forward with the designation.
NYT reported:
The Trump administration has resurrected the proposal to brand the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization, prompting a fierce debate between the government’s political appointees and its career experts.
The designation would impose wide-ranging American economic and travel sanctions on companies and individuals who interact with the loose-knit Islamist movement that was founded in Egypt and is recognized as a legitimate political entity in many Muslim-majority governments.
It is the president’s latest major foreign policy decision that appears to have been heavily influenced by autocratic leaders without first being fully vetted by career American government officials.
NYT identified the “autocratic leaders” as Sisi, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia, and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed of the United Arab Emirates (UAE), all of whom have already outlawed MB in their respective countries.
The newspaper said those leaders “revile” MB simply because they consider the group a political opponent.
Several Muslim-majority countries — Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain, and Egypt — and Russia have already outlawed MB.
Qatar, which has long housed the group, and Turkey appear to remain ardent supporters.
Nevertheless, the Washington Post (WaPo) argued on Monday that “calling the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist group would make all Muslims scapegoats.”
In December 2017, MB threatened to “wage war” against the United States in response to Trump’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and move the American embassy there, a move that angered several Muslim countries and jihadi groups like al-Qaeda and the Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL).
For NYT, that is not reason enough to label the group terrorists. On the contrary, the paper claimed that “unlike the Islamic State or Al Qaeda, there is no evidence that the Egyptian group has called for, or directed, terrorist attacks against American interests.”
Critics have linked the NYT to anti-semitism in recent weeks. Citing unnamed Trump officials, the news outlet noted that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and John R. Bolton, the current national security adviser, have expressed support for the terrorist designation for MB.
The U.S. has already designated top MB offshoot Hamas, a Palestinian group intent on destroying Israel, a terrorist organization.
NYT did not identify the so-called opponents of the designation within the Trump administration.
“Beyond Turkey and Qatar, the Brotherhood or offshoots are also a recognized political party or represented in governments in Morocco, Mauritania, Tunisia, Jordan, Bahrain, and Kuwait,” it reported.
The newspaper acknowledged that officials under former President Barack Obama also considered naming MB a terrorist group. NYT, however, did not accuse of Obama of “siding with autocrats” over the consideration as it has with President Trump.
For years, some Republicans in Congress have been proposing the label.

By Trent Baker
Comey said on CBS’s “This Morning” the FBI does not spy, adding that the FBI had cause to investigate the Trump campaign and that Republicans would be fine with the investigations if the FBI had Trump been a Democrat.
“The FBI doesn’t spy, the FBI investigates,” said Comey. “We investigated a very serious allegation that Americans might be hooked up with the Russian effort to attack our democracy.”
“People just ought to look at the predication for the opening of that investigation. We should have been fired if we didn’t investigate this,” he emphasized.


By
In the midst of a late night purge of conservative accounts, Twitter banned the conservative user who used the platform to log all instances of violence used against supporters of President Trump. As Big League Politics has detailed over the last several months, vocal supporters of the president are routinely attacked in public, have their property vandalized or destroyed, and face intimidation for simple acts, such as wearing a ‘Make America Great Again’ hat or having it displayed in a vehicle.

Also last night, a parody account mocking Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was banned last night, with Twitter sending the user an email suggesting he did not properly identify it as a parody, even though the word “parody” was used both in the account’s name and bio.
Anti-Trump violence appears to be on the rise around the country.
Just this year, prominent Trump supporters Brandon Straka, Michael Knowles, and Owen Shroyer were all attacked in one day, an immigrant man was attacked in his neighborhood for wearing a ‘MAGA’ hat, a man was attacked for wearing his ‘MAGA’ hat during a Christchurch mosque vigil, a Massachusetts woman attacked a man for wearing his ‘MAGA’ hat then claimed to be the victim of the altercation, and Canadian conservative Faith Goldy and another man were attacked in nearby Toronto, Canada for wearing pro-Trump accessories and holding signs with anti-racism slogans.
The situation is exacerbated when considering crimes against private property.
Since March, at least three individuals have had their property vandalized for supporting President Trump. A recreational vehicle used to sell pro-Trump merchandise outside rallies was battered overnight, a man had his tires slashed by a woman who later admitted to being provoked by the ‘MAGA’ hat on his dashboard, and just this week tires were slashed outside a pro-Trump event.

Austria’s Kronen Zeitung daily has admitted that it received“hundreds” of letters from its readers in just over a week, after they said they felt like foreigners in their own homeland because of mass immigration.
The strong response was provoked by the paper’s columnist, Conny Bischofberger. In an interview with Vice Chancellor Heinz-Christian Strache, she called the notion of “population replacement” a concept used by “far-right extremists.”
ALSO ON RT.COMIntegration failure: Report finds 51% Vienna pupils don’t speak German at home
The term, which describes the gradual replacement of a native population by immigrants, is popular among those on the far-right. They use it to portray growing ethnic and religious diversity as a result of some deliberate malicious actions taken by “anti-popular forces.”
After she was confronted by people asking why they should not use the term, Bischofberger dismissed it in an explanatory piece as a conspiracy theory and a mere “feeling” that “may or may not correspond with the real general demographic developments.” However, she apparently failed to strike a chord with Kronen Zeitung readers, who sought to explain that this was a reality they have been living with for years.
On the streets, on public transport and in the municipal buildings: We feel alien at home.
“We were a happy household until 10 years ago. Then everything collapsed like a house of cards,” one person wrote to the newspaper.
“The mood in our condominium has deteriorated so much that we (65 and 68) are ready to move away to finally be able to live in peace again,” another couple wrote.

“Foreign-language parents with their children do not bother to speak our language… It’s sad, but one doesn’t feel well anymore,” another message read.
In our elementary school, no more excursions are conducted out of consideration for foreign languages, the diet is adapted to religious wishes and the violence of the foreign elementary school boys is frightening.
After receiving hundreds of similar messages, Bischofberger still insisted that, for many people, the notion of “population replacement” came in handy as it allowed them “not to think about the problem behind” mass immigration. However, she also admitted that “it would be cheap to defame all those people, who wrote to the Kronen Zeitung, as xenophobes, racists or far-right extremists.”
Those people were apparently asked “to accept too much migration” and did not receive enough attention from the authorities, the columnist said.
Austria took in one of the largest numbers of asylum seekers per capita during the refugee crisis. Some 150,000 people were accepted by the Alpine land since 2015 – which accounts for over one percent of its total population. Such developments gave rise to widespread anti-immigrant sentiment and brought a conservative coalition to power, which adopted a strict stance on migration.
Foreigners constitute 15.8 percent of the Austrian population, and 29.6 percent in the capital, Vienna, according to a 2018 survey. In February, a former MP from the conservative Austrian People’s Party, Marcus Franz, sparked a heated discussion on social media by saying that Austrian-born girls wear headscarves to prevent assaults from migrants on the streets of Vienna.

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.

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 –