web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu
Westlake Legal Group > Mark Meadows

Rep. Mark Meadows: Trump impeachment driven by Democrats’ evidence-free hysteria and wild allegations

Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6115155597001_6115154695001-vs Rep. Mark Meadows: Trump impeachment driven by Democrats’ evidence-free hysteria and wild allegations Mark Meadows fox-news/world/conflicts/ukraine fox-news/world fox-news/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry fox-news/politics/house-of-representatives/democrats fox-news/person/donald-trump fox-news/opinion fox news fnc/opinion fnc article 9598c47b-d691-5392-ac35-49788b4eb918

From the moment Donald Trump was inaugurated, Washington Democrats have been myopically focused on politically targeting his administration and impeaching him.

Set aside their three separate impeachment votes before anything with Ukraine ever happened.

Recall the dissemination of a fake Russian collusion conspiracy theory, built on a debunked dossier and aided by rogue senior FBI officials.

Remember the failed attempt to convict President Trump on a baseless obstruction of justice allegation.

IMPEACHMENT MARKUP HEATS UP AS DEMS INVOKE MLK, NADLER SAYS ‘WE CANNOT RELY ON AN ELECTION’ TO OUST TRUMP

And, most recently, consider the evidence-free hysteria over a secondhand allegation about a call Democrats hadn’t heard and a transcript they hadn’t read at the time – culminating in an official impeachment procedure.

The impeachment began as it ultimately stayed: a disorganized kangaroo court. Secret depositions, manipulative leaks and wild allegations seized Congress.

More from Opinion

Democrats began an effort to overturn an election behind the closed doors of a sensitive compartmented information facility used for classified information. They leaked only anti-Trump information and kept Americans in the dark from context for weeks.

And it’s certainly no wonder that Democrats guarded the full set of facts from the public as long as they could. In the weeks of open hearings, their case didn’t just render little evidence – it fell apart at the faintest sign of scrutiny.

Officials like America’s acting ambassador to Ukraine, William Taylor, admitted to never having been a party to any conversations, negotiations or discussions providing firsthand knowledge.

Former Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch didn’t finish her opening statement before acknowledging she could bring no testimony regarding any quid pro quo allegations against the president – or, the entire basis of the impeachment.

Even the “star witness” – Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland – admitted he had no evidence “other than his assumptions.” In other words: he had nothing at all.

This came even as Congress heard from multiple witnesses with firsthand accounts, directly undercutting the anti-Trump allegations.

Officials like former special envoy to Ukraine Kurt Volker and former National Security Council Russia specialist Tim Morrison were emphatic that there was no political quid pro quo, that the Ukrainians never communicated a belief otherwise, and that President Trump never ordered anything of the sort.

Remarkably, we even heard from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and his top aide, Andriy Yermak, disputing the allegations from Ukraine’s perspective.

While the Democrats had rumors and innuendo suggesting something was true, President Trump had direct witnesses testifying that the allegations were false.

Despite all this, Democrats pushed forward and introduced articles of impeachment Monday. It should be noted these articles came after Democrats made an 11th-hour rule change in the House Judiciary Committee, lowering the threshold for impeachment.

Democrats then quietly removed “bribery” from their list of allegations, after they had conducted polling that led them to allege it in the first place.

Through it all, President Trump and the White House were given virtually no rights – other than an offer to have an attorney present during the last week, when the cake had already been baked.

CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR OPINION NEWSLETTER

After a bungled process, a weak fact pattern, and a crumbling narrative, it’s now beyond any doubt: there is no policy priority too important and no lack of evidence too glaring that will prevent Washington Democrats from going after this president.

It has been the Democrats’ single-minded goal this entire Congress. They are an angry mob seeking validation. An impeachment machine in search of a cause.

But this effort to undermine the president will fail, just like their other attempts. Americans will see through it. And if Washington Democrats ever decide they’re ready to accept the results of the 2016 election, we’ll be ready to work with them on issues that matter to American families: creating more jobs, lowering health care costs, securing the border, fighting the opioid crisis and more.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Until then, while they focus on fruitless political investigations, we’ll keep working with the president to deliver on his commitments and improve everyday lives across the country. While Democrats check off impeachment votes, the president will keep checking off his promises.

And when all is said and done, it will be said of House Democrats: When they couldn’t bring themselves to support President Trump, they consoled themselves by making every effort to undermine those who did – the American voters.

 CLICK HERE TO READ MORE BY REP. MARK MEADOWS

Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6115155597001_6115154695001-vs Rep. Mark Meadows: Trump impeachment driven by Democrats’ evidence-free hysteria and wild allegations Mark Meadows fox-news/world/conflicts/ukraine fox-news/world fox-news/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry fox-news/politics/house-of-representatives/democrats fox-news/person/donald-trump fox-news/opinion fox news fnc/opinion fnc article 9598c47b-d691-5392-ac35-49788b4eb918   Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6115155597001_6115154695001-vs Rep. Mark Meadows: Trump impeachment driven by Democrats’ evidence-free hysteria and wild allegations Mark Meadows fox-news/world/conflicts/ukraine fox-news/world fox-news/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry fox-news/politics/house-of-representatives/democrats fox-news/person/donald-trump fox-news/opinion fox news fnc/opinion fnc article 9598c47b-d691-5392-ac35-49788b4eb918

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

James Comey’s Congressional Testimony Isn’t Matching What He Told the Inspector General

Westlake Legal Group ap-james-comey-grimace-620x413 James Comey’s Congressional Testimony Isn’t Matching What He Told the Inspector General Politics mccabe Mark Meadows james comey investigation Inspector General Horowitz IG Report Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story FBI donald trump doj democrats corruption

Former FBI Director James Comey reacts after bumping something under the table, during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on Capitol Hill, Thursday, June 8, 2017, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

The Inspector General report covering abuses in the Trump-Russia investigation, including FISA abuse, is done. Members of Congress are already looking at portions of it and the results are expected to be pretty bad for several former Obama officials.

In the case of former FBI Dir. James Comey, questions are arising about whether he told IG Horowitz and Congress the same story. Initial indications are producing doubt that he did.

This via Rep. Mark Meadows during a hearing yesterday with Horowitz (quotes from HotAir).

“We’ve taken, now, your report and we’ve put it side by side [with] congressional testimony that James Comey made before the joint oversight and judiciary hearing and I’m finding just a number of irregularities,” Meadows said. He continued, “So would it be appropriate if ranking member Jordan and I were to refer those inconsistencies to the IG and if we did that would the IG look at those inconsistencies?”

“It’s certainly appropriate for us to get a referral about a then-employee of the department, which is I think the hearing you’re probably referencing, and then we would assess it,” Horowitz replied.

What Meadows is asking is if he (and other members) can send a referral to Horowitz to look at specific discrepancies between the two testimonies. This could conceivably lead to even more changes being made to the IG report it self.

The problem here is the example Meadows gives.

“I’ll give you one example,” Meadows said. Referring to testimony Comey gave in December of 2018, Meadows continued, “Mr. Gowdy was asking, he said ‘Did you initiate an obstruction of justice investigation based on what the president said?’ It was a very clear question. Mr. Comey said ‘I don’t think so. I don’t recall doing that so I don’t think so.’

“However, on page 13 of your IG report, it says that Comey purposefully leaked the memo so that they could have a special counsel appointed to investigate obstruction of justice. So two of those can not be true. They’re at opposite dynamics in terms of what they’re constructing. And we have dozens of examples where that has happened.”

Yes, those two ideas are opposed and signal that Comey was saying one thing while trying to do another, but it’d be difficult to prove he lied. Starting an investigation vs. trying to get a special counsel appointed are technically different things even if they arrive at the same end game, i.e. an obstruction investigation of the President. Comey was clearly lying in spirit to Congress when he told them he didn’t initiate an obstruction investigation because that’s exactly what he did and had the intent to do by leaking the memo. But again, technically, he didn’t start the investigation, Rod Roseinstein did.

Meadows does claim he has dozens of other instances to share and perhaps he’s holding those close to his vest to give to the IG first. It’s always safe to be skeptical though. We’ve heard a lot of things over the past few years that simply haven’t materialized. No doubt Comey was corrupt, but will he actually be charged? That’s really all that matters and as long as the answer is no, faith in those institutions will continue to wane.

As far as the IG report itself, I’d expect its release next month. It’s already going through the process of revisions and redactions. All indications are it’s going to be brutal and find the Page FISA warrants were illegal, but don’t count your chickens before they hatch.

————————————————

Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive and check out some of my latest articles.

I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.

The post James Comey’s Congressional Testimony Isn’t Matching What He Told the Inspector General appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group ap-comey-eyes-closed-300x200 James Comey’s Congressional Testimony Isn’t Matching What He Told the Inspector General Politics mccabe Mark Meadows james comey investigation Inspector General Horowitz IG Report Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story FBI donald trump doj democrats corruption   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

James Comey Goes Full Cringe In Response to Recent News of His Criminal Referral

Westlake Legal Group comey-mccabe-620x348 James Comey Goes Full Cringe In Response to Recent News of His Criminal Referral Trump-Russia Russia Politics Mark Meadows james comey IG Horowitz Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story FBI democrats cringe corruption cia Bruh

The moment of silence we got from James Comey is over.

In the past few weeks, Comey had refrained from Twitter and media appearances. That happened to coincide with IG Horowitz finishing his investigation, leaving some to speculate that perhaps the former FBI Director had decided it best for his future to lay low. Then the news broke a couple of days ago that while a criminal referral was made against Comey, he would not be charged.

Inspector General (IG) Michael Horowitz’s team referred Comey for possible prosecution under the classified information protection laws, but Department of Justice (DOJ) prosecutors working for Attorney General William Barr reportedly have decided to decline prosecution – a decision that’s likely to upset Comey’s conservative critics.

That got Comey talking again after Rep. Mark Meadows called him out.

First off, anyone who uses the word “bruh” deserves solitary confinement. That’s almost as awkward as when Hillary Clinton was just “chillin” in Cedar Rapids. Whoever this guy’s publicist is needs to be fired and run out of the industry.

As to the meat of his post, this guy never stops being the most self-righteous clown at the party. Even in the midst of an IG report which is already confirmed to eviscerate his conduct, he’s still pulling the “protect this country” card and pretending he’s the only honest person left in the country. It’s bordering on pathological at this point.

What’s he going to do when the IG lays out that he lacked candor in interviews, mishandled classified information, and acted in a partisan manner? The answer is probably exactly what he’s doing here. This guy has no shame and he truly believes in an all powerful bureaucracy with no checks and balances. He has no ability to look in the mirror and admit wrongdoing. In that way, he’d probably make a good politician, which is exactly why he was an awful FBI Director.

It’s inexplicable that anyone would still try to defend the actions of the FBI during the Trump-Russia investigation. Comey is going to do his best to try though, and if that means defending people like Peter Strzok and Andrew McCabe, he’ll be on CNN to gaslight us for as long as it takes.

————————————————-

Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive and check out some of my latest articles.

I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.

The post James Comey Goes Full Cringe In Response to Recent News of His Criminal Referral appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group ap-james-comey-grimace-300x200 James Comey Goes Full Cringe In Response to Recent News of His Criminal Referral Trump-Russia Russia Politics Mark Meadows james comey IG Horowitz Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story FBI democrats cringe corruption cia Bruh   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Justin Amash quits the Freedom Caucus after calling for Trump’s impeachment. Will he quit the GOP too?

Westlake Legal Group a-2 Justin Amash quits the Freedom Caucus after calling for Trump’s impeachment. Will he quit the GOP too? Trump The Blog republican Mark Meadows libertarian Justin Amash Jim Jordan impeachment freedom caucus 2020

It was a friendly departure, he insisted to CNN afterward, never mind that the group which he helped found formally condemned him last month for concluding that Trump’s attempts to obstruct justice in the Russiagate probe were impeachable.

Amash claims he left because he didn’t want to be a “distraction.” A distraction from what? The Freedom Caucus is a small minority of the House minority. One reason why they’ve transformed from a group devoted to shrinking government into a group shilling for Trump in all things (which tracks the transformation of the wider GOP, but I digress) is that they have nothing better to do these days. The squabble with Amash is the first interesting thing to come out of the caucus since Pelosi took over.

He should have demanded that they vote to oust him. Why do them the favor of punishing himself for his own blasphemy?

“I have the highest regard for them and they’re my close friends,” [Amash] told CNN. “I didn’t want to be a further distraction for the group.”…

Amash, who was a founding member of the group, told CNN in March that he had stopped going to Freedom Caucus meetings after clashing for months with members over the group’s direction under Trump.

He told CNN he had attended a House Freedom Caucus board meeting before House votes on Monday night to announce he would step aside from both the board and the group as a whole. The other members didn’t know he would be going to the meeting…

He emphasized his decision was voluntary and that he remains on good terms with his colleagues.

He signed up for the Freedom Caucus, not the MAGA Caucus. Frankly, he should have left ages ago, although I assume he hung on in the expectation that Mueller’s verdict might help ease the tensions between him and his colleagues. If Mueller had come down firmly on Trump’s guilt, the caucus’s pushback on Amash’s impeachment call necessarily would have been more muted. If Mueller had come down firmly on Trump’s innocence, Amash himself might have dropped the Russiagate matter. Instead Mueller punted on obstruction, ensuring that the internal disagreement would linger.

Obvious question: Will Amash’s break with the Freedom Caucus end there or does the essence of his conflict with them compel him to leave the GOP too? If his rebuke of Trump is a facet of his discontent with the two-party system then it’s the logical next step. And the wider Republican caucus isn’t much less Trumpist than the Freedom Caucus itself is, after all. If Amash has decided that his position on Trump means he can’t in good conscience remain a member of a right-wing group that’s broadly aligned with him on limiting government — in theory, I should emphasize — then there’s no principled reason to remain a Republican either. There are pragmatic reasons to do so: Going independent means he’ll need to win a three-way House race next year and it’ll likely cost him his committee assignments, further reducing his influence over policy. Even if Amash is willing to continue to caucus with Republicans in hopes of retaining those assignments, it would please Kevin McCarthy’s friend Donald to see him humiliated by having them stripped.

But maybe Amash has resolved that he’s done with the GOP in its current incarnation and if that costs him his House seat, so be it. A man who wanted to stay in Washington forever wouldn’t have accused Trump of obstruction in the first place.

McCarthy was asked about Amash at this morning’s minority-leader press conference, incidentally, and gave a stupid answer:

Trumpists can hate the heretic privately as much as they like but the fact remains that Amash running for president as a libertarian would be an X factor in the 2020 campaign. He might not cost Trump many votes if he ran; he might even help Trump by giving right-leaning “Anyone But Trump” independent voters someone to vote for instead of the Democratic nominee. But it’s possible that he’d pull enough Trump-skeptic fiscal conservative righties away from POTUS to hurt him, especially in Amash’s crucial home state of Michigan. McCarthy and the rest of the party should be polite to him even in their disagreements and emphasize that he’s a Republican in good standing. Don’t give him more of a reason to leave and challenge Trump than he already has.

The post Justin Amash quits the Freedom Caucus after calling for Trump’s impeachment. Will he quit the GOP too? appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group a-2-300x153 Justin Amash quits the Freedom Caucus after calling for Trump’s impeachment. Will he quit the GOP too? Trump The Blog republican Mark Meadows libertarian Justin Amash Jim Jordan impeachment freedom caucus 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

McCabe Transcript: Comey’s May 2016 Draft of Clinton Exoneration Statement Was ‘Not Normal FBI Protocol’

Westlake Legal Group andrew-mccabe-620x376 McCabe Transcript: Comey’s May 2016 Draft of Clinton Exoneration Statement Was ‘Not Normal FBI Protocol’ Mark Meadows james comey Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Featured Story FBI and DOJ Corruption democrats corruption Congress Bob Goodlatte Andrew McCabe Allow Media Exception Abuse of Power

 

We all know that in early May of 2016, then-FBI Director James Comey wrote a draft of an letter exonerating Hillary Clinton in their “Midyear Exam” investigation. We also know that this draft was written two months before the FBI had even interviewed Hillary or any other witnesses involved in the case. Comey has testified that Hillary “was not sworn in and that the interview was not recorded.”

After Comey had written the draft, he sent an email to several of his colleagues to test the language. The recipients included then-FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, then-FBI General Counsel James Baker and then-Chief of Staff and Senior Counselor James Rybicki.

In a recently released transcript of McCabe’s December 2018 closed-door Congressional testimony, then-House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte read Comey’s email.

(Note: These transcripts were released three weeks ago, but this issue was not addressed by the media.)

The penultimate paragraph of the May 2 draft reads as follows: Accordingly, although the Department of Justice makes final decisions on matters such as this, I am completing the investigation by expressing to Justice my view that no charges are appropriate in this case.

Goodlatte pointed out that, “This paragraph is virtually identical to what Director Comey eventually said more than 2 months later on July 25, 2016, in recommending no charges against Secretary Clinton. It seems to confirm that the FBI, including the Director, had made up its mind not to charge Secretary Clinton before interviewing her.”

McCabe responded, “It may seem that way reading it now. But I know that Director Comey had not made up his mind at that time.”

He was asked if Comey had “tested language” for a statement to be used in the event the FBI were to recommend charges against Hillary and McCabe said no.

McCabe was then questioned by Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) and his answers told a different story. Here is the exchange.

Meadows:  So is this common practice, in normal investigations of every type, to do a memo 2 months ahead of time to lay out what you’re going to say with a conclusion?  So let’s take it outside of this particular person.  How many other times does that happen?

McCabe:  No, sir, it’s not common.

Meadows:  So this is a unique situation where he did it this one time?

McCabe:  This is the only time I am aware of, sir…

Meadows:  Is this case so unique that you would have a prepared document 2 months ahead of interviewing the witness?  Is that normal protocol within the FBI?

McCabe:  It is not normal protocol within the FBI to release a statement about a case —

Meadows:  That’s not the question I asked, Mr. McCabe.

McCabe:  We believed we were going to —

Meadows:  Is it normal protocol — is it normal protocol to draft a letter by the FBI 2 months before you interviewed the witness to draw a conclusion?  Is that normal protocol?

McCabe:  I have not seen that before, sir.

Meadows:  So your answer is no, it’s not normal protocol?

McCabe:  I’m not aware of that protocol.  I’ve never seen that.  I haven’t been through an experience like this in the pendency of my career.  So, no, I’ve never seen that before.

Meadows:  I yield back.

We’ll take that as a no.

Meadows spoke to Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo on Sunday, and indicated there would be a delay in DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz’ report because new information has come to his attention. He also said he expected criminal referrals.

Hmmm.

The post McCabe Transcript: Comey’s May 2016 Draft of Clinton Exoneration Statement Was ‘Not Normal FBI Protocol’ appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group andrew-mccabe-300x182 McCabe Transcript: Comey’s May 2016 Draft of Clinton Exoneration Statement Was ‘Not Normal FBI Protocol’ Mark Meadows james comey Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Featured Story FBI and DOJ Corruption democrats corruption Congress Bob Goodlatte Andrew McCabe Allow Media Exception Abuse of Power   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com