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 > Nancy Pelosi

Anti-Trumper Chris Wallace Presses Mike Pence: ‘Why Didn’t the President Tell Nancy Pelosi’ About Raid?’

Westlake Legal Group MikePenceAPimage-620x317 Anti-Trumper Chris Wallace Presses Mike Pence: ‘Why Didn’t the President Tell Nancy Pelosi’ About Raid?’ Vice-President Mike Pence progressives President Trump Nancy Pelosi Liberal Elitism International Affairs Front Page Stories Featured Story democrats Congress Chris Wallace Allow Media Exception al-baghdadi Raid adam schiff 2020

Vice President Mike Pence speaks to the annual meeting of the National Rifle Association, Friday, April 26, 2019, in Indianapolis. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

 

Fox News’ host Chris Wallace, who no longer bothers to hide his hatred for President Trump, interviewed Vice President Mike Pence on Sunday about the raid that killed ISIS leader Abu Bekr al-Baghdadi.

“The president was asked specifically whether he had informed the Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi about this raid last night, and he said no, and then he added ‘I wanted to make sure that no American forces were lost.’ The implication seeming to be that he was worried that Pelosi or members of Congress would leak this. Does the president not trust the Speaker of the House with sensitive national security information?” asked Wallace.

Pence refused to go there. He told Wallace, “I don’t think that was the implication at all. I think from the time that we got actionable intelligence, the President’s total focus here was on a successful mission and the safety of American troops.”

Wallace asked the question again, “Why didn’t he tell Nancy Pelosi?”

Pence answered, “We maintain the tightest possible security here and when we got the confirmation on Saturday that al-Baghdadi was on site and our troops began to move into the region, as the President said, our aircraft were moving over some very potentially hostile areas. We wanted them to be able to get in and get out, it’s a dangerous mission on the ground. They went with the resolve and the determination (inaudible) to bring al-Baghdadi to justice but they also went with our prayers and I just couldn’t be more proud. When they were wheels up out of country, no American casualties and al-Baghdadi is dead.”

Wallace pressed further, “We all applaud that. I do want to ask you, it is my job as a newsman sir, respectfully, why didn’t the President notify the Speaker of the House?”

Again, Pence dodged the question saying, “I just want to emphasize the president’s focus here throughout particularly the last several days was on the mission to bring a man who was the most wanted man in the world, a man who had brought unspeakable violence through the ISIS caliphate, who was exporting violence throughout the world to justice and that combined with ensuring the safety of our forces coming in, executing the mission and moving out was the president’s directive throughout this effort and I know it animated every decision that he made along the way.”

Actually, Mike, the President could not have been more clear. When a reporter asked President Trump if he “had notified the congressional leaders about this? Pelosi, Schiff, Mitch McConnell?,” he replied:

We notified some. Others are being notified now as I speak. We were going to notify them last night but we decided not to do that because Washington leaks like I’ve never seen before. There’s no country in the world that leaks like we do. And Washington is a leaking machine. And I told my people we will not notify them until our great people are out, not just in, but out. I don’t want to have them greeted with firepower like you wouldn’t believe. So, we were able to get in. It was top secret…

A leak could have cost the deaths of all of them.

At another point, Trump answered, “No, I didn’t. I didn’t do that. I wanted to make sure this kept secret. I don’t want to have men lost, and women. I don’t want to have people lost.”

Although the Vice President is far too diplomatic to say it, no Chris, the President does not trust the Speaker of the House with sensitive national security information? Or any information. For three years, Pelosi and other House Democratic leaders have been gunning for Trump. After winning back the House majority during the midterms, removing the President from office has been their number one priority.

Back in December, Pelosi began rewriting the relevant House rules which would ease the way to impeachment for the 116th Congress. Even before returning to Washington in January, committee Chairmen were mapping out their strategies and planning their investigations to find a crime with which to destroy Trump.

The President is not imagining they are out to get them.

Although Democrats had no choice but to try to act as if they were pleased that the most wanted terrorist had been killed, or risk the appearance of being un-American.

But they weren’t pleased at all because it gave Donald Trump another win, a very major one, to add to his growing list of achievements.

Yesterday, I addressed this question in a post. I truly believe that Pelosi would have preferred seeing the special forces troops lose their lives in a spectacular debacle than to see him take a victory lap. Yes, although Pence refused to admit it, Trump’s distrust of the Democrats was precisely the reason they were not told ahead of time.

Regarding Trump’s decision not to notify Democratic leaders in advance, Pelosi said, “The House must be briefed on this raid, which the Russians, but not top congressional leadership were notified of in advance, and on the administration’s overall strategy in the region. Our military and allies deserve strong, smart and strategic leadership from Washington.”

First, Russia had to be notified because the men had to fly over Russian controlled areas and likely have been shot down otherwise. Secondly, it wasn’t too long ago, Pelosi, pointed a finger at the President, asked him why do all roads lead to Putin, then stormed out of the meeting.

Frankly, Pelosi and her minions pose a far greater threat to President Trump than Putin.

Additionally, she and Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee Adam Schiff, last weekend, “led a high-level congressional delegation to Afghanistan and did not publicly disclose the trip until the group had returned.”

And the whole thing is especially rich given the secrecy with which the Democrats have been conducting their impeachment hearings.

(Relevant segment begins at 9:50.)

The post Anti-Trumper Chris Wallace Presses Mike Pence: ‘Why Didn’t the President Tell Nancy Pelosi’ About Raid?’ appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group MikePenceAPimage-300x153 Anti-Trumper Chris Wallace Presses Mike Pence: ‘Why Didn’t the President Tell Nancy Pelosi’ About Raid?’ Vice-President Mike Pence progressives President Trump Nancy Pelosi Liberal Elitism International Affairs Front Page Stories Featured Story democrats Congress Chris Wallace Allow Media Exception al-baghdadi Raid adam schiff 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Reporter Asks Trump if he’s Notified Congressional Leaders About al-Baghdadi Raid; ‘We Decided Not to Because Washington Leaks Like I’ve Never Seen Before’

Westlake Legal Group AP_18271664262015-620x419 Reporter Asks Trump if he’s Notified Congressional Leaders About al-Baghdadi Raid; ‘We Decided Not to Because Washington Leaks Like I’ve Never Seen Before’ william barr President Trump Nancy Pelosi Michael Horowitz Impeachment of President Trump Front Page Stories FISA Abuse report Featured Story elections democrats death of al-Baghdadi corruption Congress adam schiff 2020

President Donald Trump smiles during a meeting with Chilean president Sebastian Pinera, in the Oval Office of the White House, Friday, Sept. 28, 2018, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

 

After notifying the American people that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was dead, he was asked by a reporter if he has “notified the congressional leaders about this? Pelosi, Schiff, Mitch McConnell?”

President Trump replied:

We notified some. Others are being notified now as I speak. We were going to notify them last night but we decided not to do that because Washington leaks like I’ve never seen before. There’s no country in the world that leaks like we do. And Washington is a leaking machine. And I told my people we will not notify them until our great people are out, not just in, but out. I don’t want to have them greeted with firepower like you wouldn’t believe. So, we were able to get in. It was top secret…

A leak could have cost the deaths of all of them.

President Trump was right not to notify them ahead of time. They can’t be trusted. This is a group of people who have a vested interest in preventing Donald Trump from getting a win, especially a foreign policy win.

Democrats are notorious leakers. They impose strict secrecy rules around their impeachment inquiry meetings, then they strategically leak just the right sound bites, usually taken out of context.

And, coming on the heels of the sharp rebuke Trump has faced over his decision to withdraw troops from Northern Syria, this moment is all the sweeter. Would you trust Adam Schiff or Nancy Pelosi to put country before politics? I wouldn’t.

Given the choice between the deaths of 50 anonymous U.S. soldiers or watching Trump take a victory lap, I believe they would choose the former. And then Pelosi would appear on cable and ask Americans to pray for our fallen soldiers and their families.

DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz delivered his completed FISA Abuse report to Attorney General William Barr over six weeks ago. Democratic leaders know exactly what’s in it. Yet, there hasn’t been a single leak which I find to be extraordinary. If there were some good news in there for Democrats and/or some bad news for Republicans, there would have been a leak.

That’s how the Democrats operate. They just can’t help themselves.

Here’s to our troops!

The post Reporter Asks Trump if he’s Notified Congressional Leaders About al-Baghdadi Raid; ‘We Decided Not to Because Washington Leaks Like I’ve Never Seen Before’ appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group Kanye-Trump-2-225x300 Reporter Asks Trump if he’s Notified Congressional Leaders About al-Baghdadi Raid; ‘We Decided Not to Because Washington Leaks Like I’ve Never Seen Before’ william barr President Trump Nancy Pelosi Michael Horowitz Impeachment of President Trump Front Page Stories FISA Abuse report Featured Story elections democrats death of al-Baghdadi corruption Congress adam schiff 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Video: Compare and Contrast the Media’s Treatment of Jan Brewer and Obama vs Treatment of Nancy Pelosi and Trump

Westlake Legal Group JanBrewerAPimage-620x317 Video: Compare and Contrast the Media’s Treatment of Jan Brewer and Obama vs Treatment of Nancy Pelosi and Trump white house washington D.C. Social Media republicans Politics North Carolina Nancy Pelosi Media journalism jan brewer Front Page Stories Front Page Feminism Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats Culture Congress California Barack Obama Arizona Allow Media Exception

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer announces that she will not seek a third term and will retire at the end of her current term, Wednesday, March 12, 2014, in Glendale, Ariz. (AP Photo/Matt York)

Last week, I wrote about how former Gov. Jan Brewer (R-AZ) complained on social media about the rough treatment the mainstream media gave her after her famous “pointing at Obama” incident in 2012 in contrast to their fangirling over a similar image of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and President Trump, which was shared on Twitter by Trump on Wednesday.

To recap, after the President posted the picture and captioned it “Nervous Nancy’s unhinged meltdown!”, Pelosi’s staff countered by making the picture he tweeted the header image on her Twitter page:

The media swooned over the photo. As Newsbusters’ Nicholas Fondacaro noted at the time, MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell and Lester Holt were among the many who were in awe of the supposed symbolism of the image.

CNN’s Dana Bash was another who couldn’t help but gush over the photo, and how Pelosi and her staff “owned” the moment where she “[stood up] … at a table of all men” against Trump.

Brewer weighed in on Twitter on Thursday, noting the backlash she received when she stood up to Obama versus how Pelosi was treated like a queen over her finger-pointing at Trump:

I included examples in my post which showed that Brewer was spot-on in her characterization of the media’s hypocrisy.

But seeing their duplicity in living color shines an even brighter, starker light on the two faced nature of the mainstream media when it comes to women in politics confronting men who are more powerful than them.

The Free Beacon did a must-watch video mashup last Friday that included numerous examples of how the MSM breathlessly reported on Pelosi “standing up to Trump” versus what they said about Brewer’s 2012 confrontation with President Obama.

There’s no question that liberal media bias exists. I’ve written about it for over 16 years, but even I was taken aback at just how blatant the double standards were in this case after I watched the video:

Wow. And the MSM still wonders why we don’t trust them to cover the issues fairly?

——-
— Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 16+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter. –

The post Video: Compare and Contrast the Media’s Treatment of Jan Brewer and Obama vs Treatment of Nancy Pelosi and Trump appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group JanBrewerAPimage-300x153 Video: Compare and Contrast the Media’s Treatment of Jan Brewer and Obama vs Treatment of Nancy Pelosi and Trump white house washington D.C. Social Media republicans Politics North Carolina Nancy Pelosi Media journalism jan brewer Front Page Stories Front Page Feminism Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats Culture Congress California Barack Obama Arizona Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Open Letter to Nancy Pelosi and the New York Times; ‘A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag’

Westlake Legal Group AP_080722043710-620x306 Open Letter to Nancy Pelosi and the New York Times; ‘A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag’ The New York Times Nancy Pelosi Media Liberal Elitism Justin Amash Impeachment of President Trump Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Featured Story FBI and DOJ Corruption elections donald trump democrats corruption Congress Barack Obama Allow Media Exception adam schiff Abuse of Power 2020

 

When faced with criticism from Republicans over her undeniably politically driven, secretive, and unjust impeachment inquiry, Nancy Pelosi called for backup from the media which her party controls. This was a big job, so she enlisted the New York Times. And they did not disappoint.

In one of their most partisan, farfetched assaults on Republicans to date, the “paper of record” summoned the age old adage “Accuse your opponent of that which you are guilty.” It sounds like one of Saul Alinsky’s rules, but it dates back to at least World War II.

In an op-ed published on Friday entitled “The Crisis of the Republican Party: The G.O.P. will not be able to postpone a reckoning on Donald Trump’s presidency for much longer,” the editorial board excoriated Republicans for continuing to support President Trump. The cover photo shows the “Peace Statue” which is located near the U.S. Capitol and depicts “Grief weeping on the shoulder of History.”

The piece opens by comparing Republicans of today with those who allowed Sen. Joe McCarthy to continue his campaign against communism through their silence in the 1950s. The Times’ editors write:

The Republican Party is again confronting a crisis of conscience, one that has been gathering force ever since Donald Trump captured the party’s nomination in 2016. Afraid of his political influence, and delighted with his largely conservative agenda, party leaders have compromised again and again, swallowing their criticisms and tacitly if not openly endorsing presidential behavior they would have excoriated in a Democrat. Compromise by compromise, Donald Trump has hammered away at what Republicans once saw as foundational virtues: decency, honesty, responsibility. He has asked them to substitute loyalty to him for their patriotism itself.”

What Democrats have lost sight of is that Trump is not “looking for dirt” on an opponent. He has two very legitimate reasons for his inquiries.

First, he’s looking to hold people accountable for the grave injustice that was thrust upon him and which consumed the better part of his first term. There was a concerted effort to frame him for a crime he didn’t commit. Those who are complicit are acutely aware of this. As they feel John Durham getting closer to the truth, they are panicking. For a time, they thought they’d gotten away with it.

This was a perversion of justice on an epic scale. What sane person wouldn’t want to discover who was involved and how it evolved? We need to expose this fraud so it doesn’t happen to a future president.

Hillary Clinton, who commissioned the opposition research from which this whole narrative sprung, was until her defeat a master of manipulation. It no longer works for her. Last week, she tried to spin a false narrative around Tulsi Gabbard. Since by now Hillary’s name has become synonymous with corruption, her effort was cut off at the knees.

But that how it starts. It’s that easy. “You know, it sure looks like Trump is getting cozy with the Russians.” When that message gets repeated over and over again by influential and respected government officials, and then agencies like the FBI and the CIA pick up the mantra, it takes on a life of its own.

Then, enemies within Trump’s own party see an opportunity to “get back” at him, it fans the flames even further. For example, one of Trump’s bitter 2016 rivals, former Ohio John Kasich, jumped on the bandwagon this week to say, with great sadness of course, that he believes Trump’s statements to Zelensky rise to the level of impeachment. In fact, the Times’  editors wrote that Republicans should follow the lead of men like Kasich. They also suggested Justin Amash, best known as the only Republican Congressman to call for Trump’s impeachment. Further, on the Fourth of July, Amash declared his “independence” and left the Republican Party. The Times’ choice of two of the President’s most outspoken critics as leaders we should look to emulate speaks to the weakness of their argument.

And second, Joe Biden leveraged $1 billion in U.S. aid to force Ukraine to fire the prosecutor who was about to question his son. Yes, I know, Biden claims the prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, was corrupt. However:

1. Biden has no evidence of Shokin’s corruption.

2. Biden had a strong motive in silencing Shokin. Parents will go to great lengths to protect their children.

3. Ukraine is known for corruption. If Shokin posed no threat to Biden, what was the point of insisting on a six-hour deadline. Why was it so urgent that he be fired immediately? If Shokin were corrupt, so were a thousand other Ukrainian officials. Why Shokin? Why immediately?

4. Shokin appeared in a court of law where he signed a sworn affidavit stating otherwise.

5. Biden has a history of both embellishing and even fabricating stories.

There are compelling reasons to suspect Biden of wrongdoing. Even if Biden were not running for President, there’s more than enough smoke here to warrant an investigation.

The editorial says:

There was a time when Republicans like Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa said that soliciting foreign election assistance would be improper. But most congressional Republicans have taken to avoiding such questions as the evidence against Mr. Trump has piled up.

Okay, let’s talk about soliciting foreign election assistance. Hillary Clinton and the DNC commissioned a Washington op-research firm, Fusion GPS, to hire former British spy Christopher Steele to tap his foreign contacts to compile an unverified document of stories about candidate Trump (truth not required). This spy had his foreign information hand delivered to the FBI by the fourth highest ranking DOJ official, Bruce Ohr, who acted as the backchannel. Ohr’s wife, Nellie Ohr, was an independent contractor who worked for Fusion GPS to dig up dirt during 2016 on members of the Trump family. Testifying under oath before Congress, Nellie Ohr admitted much of her information came from a Ukrainian source. She put together a dossier of her own in the summer of 2016 which her husband delivered to the FBI on a thumbdrive.

The owner of Fusion GPS, Glenn Simpson, had several Russian clients, one of whom was Natalia Veselnitskaya, one of the Russians who initiated and attended the infamous Trump Tower meeting with Donald Trump, Jr. in June 2016. Simpson had dinner with Veselnitskaya the night before the meeting and after the meeting.

Although it hasn’t been definitely proven yet, evidence suggests the FBI sent spies into the Trump campaign. They arranged for Joseph Mifsud to meet with George Papadopoulos in Rome and London. This information will become more clear after the IG report is released which is said to be this week. A full accounting of everything that occurred on foreign soil is beyond the scope of this post, but it is vast. And it allowed the perpetrators to circumvent U.S. laws.

The editors continue:

Yet Republicans will not be able to postpone a reckoning with Trumpism for much longer. The investigation by House Democrats appears likely to result in a vote for impeachment, despite efforts by the White House to obstruct the inquiry.

So do it. Go ahead and impeach him. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi likely has the votes. What is her hesitation? As most of us are aware, the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry is not even official because Pelosi has refused to hold a vote on the House floor to open it. She called a press conference to announce her impeachment inquiry, yet she won’t pull the trigger. On Friday, she announced that she “would not be holding a vote anytime soon.”

She has several good reasons for not doing so. First, it will leave Democratic members of Congress from districts where Trump won vulnerable. Second, once a formal floor vote is taken to open an impeachment inquiry, Republicans, who have been shut out of the process entirely, would gain the power to issue subpoenas and to question witnesses. The Democrats are very happy with their unofficial unilateral impeachment. Third, once the House votes to impeach, they will lose control of the narrative. The impeachment inquiry would be then in the hands of the Senate. The House Democrats would become irrelevant. And the matter would be treated much differently by the Republican controlled Senate.

The Constitution’s framers envisioned America’s political leaders as bound by a devotion to country above all else. That’s why all elected officials take an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. By protecting Donald Trump at all costs from all consequences, the Republicans risk violating that sacred oath.

Please don’t lecture us about sacred oaths and devotion to country. Your words are hypocritical, misguided and pathetic. Nothing is sacred to Nancy Pelosi or her front man, Adam Schiff, except for their insatiable hunger for power. Democrats don’t love America, nor do they respect the rule of law.

They’ve tried everything they could possibly conceive of to destroy this man. They were counting on Special Counsel Robert Mueller to deliver for them. When his investigation failed to result in an indictment, they chose Ukraine-gate.

Our founders never intended for impeachment to be used as a political tool for one party to take power from another. It was “supposed to be reserved for truly abominable misconduct.”

The New York Times has jumped the shark. Perhaps it happened when they tried to rewrite history with the launch of the 1691 project. Or maybe before.

Along the way, the left forgot one of Alinsky’s most important rules. “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.”

This fraud has dragged on too long.

Barr and Durham are closing in, and they will be exposed.

And, like they say, history will remember it.

The post Open Letter to Nancy Pelosi and the New York Times; ‘A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag’ appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group AP_080722043710-300x148 Open Letter to Nancy Pelosi and the New York Times; ‘A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag’ The New York Times Nancy Pelosi Media Liberal Elitism Justin Amash Impeachment of President Trump Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Featured Story FBI and DOJ Corruption elections donald trump democrats corruption Congress Barack Obama Allow Media Exception adam schiff Abuse of Power 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Harold Finch Comments on a Tale of Two Pictures (Me, too)

Intrepid independent researcher @NameRedacted was suspended multiple times on Twitter for what amounted to hurting the feelings of leftists and challenging their blatant lies. In his final incarnation, he was “Harold Finch,” and after being suspended for the final time has subsequently moved to Telegram where he runs a repository consisting of important factoids, linked articles, and personal commentary available to the masses. He can be found here.

Sometimes his poignant commentary deserves a much wider audience, and San Fran Nan’s staged walkout of the meeting with President Trump the other day provided the impetus for this blast. I will add my own two cents at the end.

Before getting to our commentary, here is the what transpired at the meeting:

President Trump and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., heated up their ongoing war of words after a White House meeting on Syria devolved into name-calling and led to Democrats storming out, with both sides accusing the other of a “meltdown.” Pelosi, along with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., walked out of the meeting Wednesday afternoon, which had been intended to discuss the administration’s decision to pull troops out of northern Syria. That decision has sparked bipartisan criticism that the decision betrays the Kurds, while giving a boost to ISIS.

White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham dismissed the [Democrat] reports about the meeting [Cvrk comment: they ran to the press microphones in a staged event after walking out of the meeting to spin it like they always do]:

“The President was measured, factual and decisive, while Speaker Pelosi’s decision to walk out was baffling, but not surprising,” Grisham said. “She had no intention of listening or contributing to an important meeting on national security issues. While democratic leadership chose to storm out and get in front of the cameras to whine, everyone else in the meeting chose to stay in the room and work on behalf of this country.”

Read the rest here. That pretty much says it all, but there are a couple pictures from the event that provide a lot more than simple context, as Harold Finch notes! Without further ado, here is his analysis….

This White House meeting that included hysterics by Nancy Pelosi can really be defined as a tale of two pictures. The first is unhinged Pelosi lecturing the man who writes the letters to the families of the fallen soldiers (the meetings centered on “Turkey and the Kurds”). Check out the first picture here:

Westlake Legal Group First-pic-201x300 Harold Finch Comments on a Tale of Two Pictures (Me, too) Uncategorized Turkey Politics Policy National Security Nancy Pelosi Middle East Liberal Elitism ISIS Front Page Stories Foreign Policy Featured Story donald trump democrats Democrat Lies Abuse of Power

Note carefully that her body language screams out of control, rude, and disrespectful. And Chuck Schumer smirking like a childish teenager watching the mouthy kid run her mouth at the Teacher. This is supposed to be a national security meeting on events in Syria. The Democrats are acting like they are the Commander in Chief berating an officer who is giving them advice they don’t want to hear. They’re drunk on Power. They’re demanding the President start a war with a NATO member and sacrifice our soldiers, all while they refuse to vote to authorize use of force much less vote to declare war on Turkey. That means this cry for war isn’t even a serious one. They don’t believe in it enough to hold a vote. They want President Trump to get into an ugly quagmire that bleeds us white to help them in 2020 election. They don’t care about Kurds. They CERTAINLY don’t care about American Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines.

Then there is the second picture which is QUITE a contrast!

Westlake Legal Group Second-pic-203x300 Harold Finch Comments on a Tale of Two Pictures (Me, too) Uncategorized Turkey Politics Policy National Security Nancy Pelosi Middle East Liberal Elitism ISIS Front Page Stories Foreign Policy Featured Story donald trump democrats Democrat Lies Abuse of Power

In this picture, we have the President, the Secretary of Defense, the National Security Advisor, the Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the House Minority Leader, and others. In this picture, the President’s body language says he rejects her attack and is insulted. You can see it in his face he is insulted. This man writes every letter to families of those Mil families who loved one’s life is lost. He sees their pain up close & face to face. Their lives matter to him. He’s sitting down. He’s not aggressive in posture, but he’s offended.

The Chairman of JCS is looking down ignoring Pelosi. See his shoulder? US Army Special Forces & Ranger Tabs. Chest full of medals. He doesn’t take her seriously. His hands clasped likely praying. This is serious business. Everyone on this side of the table is sober & here for serious business. No laughing. No mocking. No insults. The SECDEF is clearly tense, with hands clasped, lips parsed, and a stern brow. He’s seething mad but determined to hide it.

Here’s the whole picture for comparison purposes:

Westlake Legal Group Third-pic-620x413 Harold Finch Comments on a Tale of Two Pictures (Me, too) Uncategorized Turkey Politics Policy National Security Nancy Pelosi Middle East Liberal Elitism ISIS Front Page Stories Foreign Policy Featured Story donald trump democrats Democrat Lies Abuse of Power

Everyone else on the President’s side of the table, including the House minority leader Kevin McCarthy, is embarrassed by and disgusted with Pelosi, Hoyer and Schumer. It’s clear the three of them never intended for this to be a good faith meeting. This was Pelosi threatening the President and he, his advisers, the Republicans, and the national security staff having none of their childishness. No one accepted the Democrats’ putting politics before America’s national security and the lives of our troops. The only skin in the game that the Democrats have is crass partisan politics; the lives of our troops are merely chess pieces in their quest for political power.

Here is a final picture, showing the President making a measured statement to the lesser-ranking Democrats who remained in the meeting.

Westlake Legal Group Fourth-pic-620x405 Harold Finch Comments on a Tale of Two Pictures (Me, too) Uncategorized Turkey Politics Policy National Security Nancy Pelosi Middle East Liberal Elitism ISIS Front Page Stories Foreign Policy Featured Story donald trump democrats Democrat Lies Abuse of Power

This is the aftermath: when Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer and Steny Hoyer couldn’t force the Commander in Chief into a bloody quagmire in Syria a year before a presidential election, they threw a temper tantrum and stormed out.

Let me be blunt: the Democrats don’t give a flying f**k about America, our troops, the Kurds, or about YOU whom they are supposedly serving. The *ONLY* thing the Democrats care about is obtaining AND KEEPING political power AT ANY COST.

The moral of this sordid story is, Ddn’t ever let these dangerous people have power. It is CRITICAL to the safety of our nation that we take the House away from Pelosi &and further marginalize Chuck Schumer. You have a choice in 2020, America: a president and Congress who want the wars ended and the troops to come home, or a resident and congress who want endless wars and endless sacrifice of American lives to keep them in power. Choose wisely.

End of Finch’ commentary

A couple of points to add to Finch’s excellent synopsis:

  • San Fran Nan is concerned that pulling out 26 (!) special forces soldiers off the Syria-Turkey border is going to let ISIS back in the game? That’s laughable, particularly after her total silence during the years in which Obama allowed ISIS grow from nothing into a threat!
  • This isn’t the first time that they’ve pulled this stunt (running to a media microphone to spin a contentious meeting with @POTUS). This is what career politicians do; non-politicians and problem-solvers like @POTUS work through differences and deliver the goods!

Finally, here is the most accurate pictorial characterization of that White House meeting. Unbelievably spot on!

Westlake Legal Group Fifth-pic-620x262 Harold Finch Comments on a Tale of Two Pictures (Me, too) Uncategorized Turkey Politics Policy National Security Nancy Pelosi Middle East Liberal Elitism ISIS Front Page Stories Foreign Policy Featured Story donald trump democrats Democrat Lies Abuse of Power

The end.

The post Harold Finch Comments on a Tale of Two Pictures (Me, too) appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group Screen-Shot-2019-10-18-at-3.17.37-PM-300x185 Harold Finch Comments on a Tale of Two Pictures (Me, too) Uncategorized Turkey Politics Policy National Security Nancy Pelosi Middle East Liberal Elitism ISIS Front Page Stories Foreign Policy Featured Story donald trump democrats Democrat Lies Abuse of Power   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Poor Adam Schiff, What a Difference a Report in the New York Times Can Make

Westlake Legal Group smug-schiff-620x317 Poor Adam Schiff, What a Difference a Report in the New York Times Can Make whistleblower Nancy Pelosi Impeachment of President Trump Impeachment Inquiry Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats corruption Congress Campaigns Allow Media Exception adam schiff Abuse of Power 2020

(AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File)

Poor little Adam Schiff. He thought he had all of his ducks in a row. Then the New York Times had to go and report that a member of his staff had been in contact with the whistleblower before he filed his complaint.

Prior to this revelation, Schiff had insisted that the whistleblower testify under oath before the House Intelligence Committee which he chairs. Ever since news broke that the whistleblower had prior communications with his committee, he’s been trying to avoid it.

Having observed Schiff in action, we can only conclude that he doesn’t want Republican members of Congress to be able to question the whistleblower about his contacts with Schiff’s staff or the media. Also, knowing Schiff, I wouldn’t be surprised if he himself met with the whistleblower before the complaint was submitted.

On September 24th, he tweeted that they’d been “informed by the whistleblower’s counsel that their client would like to speak to our committee and has requested guidance from the Acting DNI as to how to do so. We‘re in touch with counsel and look forward to the whistleblower’s testimony as soon as this week.”

Schiff contacted the acting Director of National Intelligence, Joseph Maguire, on September 26. He wrote:

Do I have your assurance that once you work out the security clearances for the whistleblower’s counsel, that that whistleblower will be able to relate the full facts within his knowledge that concern wrongdoing by the president or anyone else, that he or she will not be inhibited in what they can tell our committee, that there will not be some minder from the White House or elsewhere sitting next to them telling them what they can answer or not answer? Do I have your assurance that the whistleblower will be able to testify fully and freely and enjoy the protections of the law?

On September 29, Schiff made it clear he expected the whistleblower to testify “without a minder from the Justice Department or from the White House to tell the whistleblower what they can or cannot say. We’ll get the unfiltered testimony of that whistleblower.”

Shortly afterwards, Schiff was asked on MSNBC if he’d had any knowledge of the whistleblower before the complaint was submitted and he said no.

On October 2, the New York Times published the story that the whistleblower had contacted a House Intelligence Committee aide. The report said the whistleblower had first expressed his concerns to a CIA colleague and asked him to convey them to the C.I.A.’s top lawyer. It’s unclear if the issue was ever raised with the CIA’s lawyer or if it had been and he didn’t think the whistleblower had a case. Either way, nothing came from that effort, so the whistleblower reached out to Schiff’s aide. The Times writes that “in both cases, the original accusation was vague.” In fact it was so vague, and after reading a transcript of the call, many of us, like the FBI’s top lawyer, still don’t see what his concern was.

The report said the staffer told Schiff about the whistleblower, but did not reveal his identity. Sure.

He was forced to qualify his earlier denial to MSNBC and after that, “Schiff stopped demanding the testimony, and last Sunday he claimed it was no longer needed. While the extent of their coordination is unknown, the major problem was that the discussions were undisclosed by both Schiff and the anti-Trump complainant. Schiff had publicly denied any such interactions while the bureaucrat failed to mention the contacts when specifically asked about them on a government form.”

Another major change that took place after the story in the Times, is that the Democrats became very secretive to the extent that they wouldn’t allow Republican members of Congress to sit in on the depositions or even view the transcripts. In this way, they could cherry pick the most damaging information to leak to the media.

Last Sunday, Schiff told CBS News, “Given that we already have the call record, we don’t need the whistleblower who wasn’t on the call to tell us what took place during the call. We have the best evidence of that.”

Given that we already have the call record, we don’t need the whistleblower or his complaint. Since we’re talking about impeaching the President of the United States here, something that doesn’t happen everyday, I think a personal appearance is called for.

As most of us are aware, the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry is not official because House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has refused to hold a vote on the House floor. On Friday, she announced that she “would not be holding a vote anytime soon.”

She has several good reasons for not doing so. It would hurt House Democrats from purple districts where support for Trump is strong.

Once a formal floor vote is taken to open an impeachment inquiry, the Republicans, who have been shut out of the process entirely, would gain the power to subpoena and to question witnesses.

The Federalist’s David Marcus points out another reason why Pelosi might be holding back.

Once the gavel falls on an actual impeachment, the House, the only chamber the Democrats hold, becomes irrelevant. That is a political disaster, and it is why the Democrats are still very unlikely to actually pull that trigger.

The ball will move into the Senate’s court and Pelosi and the House will have no more control over it. That’s a very big deal, because from the day they took over the House the Democrats have been able to frustrate Trump with impeachment talk any time they want to step on his initiatives or triumphs. Once a vote is held, that is over.

What’s a Speaker to do?

The post Poor Adam Schiff, What a Difference a Report in the New York Times Can Make appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group smug-schiff-300x153 Poor Adam Schiff, What a Difference a Report in the New York Times Can Make whistleblower Nancy Pelosi Impeachment of President Trump Impeachment Inquiry Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats corruption Congress Campaigns Allow Media Exception adam schiff Abuse of Power 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Video: Liz Cheney Reminds Pelosi, Schiff of One Important Thing They’re Forgetting About Impeachment Process

Westlake Legal Group LizCheneyScreenGrab-620x391 Video: Liz Cheney Reminds Pelosi, Schiff of One Important Thing They’re Forgetting About Impeachment Process Wyoming washington D.C. Social Media schiff republicans Politics North Carolina Nancy Pelosi Liz Cheney Impeachment of President Trump impeachment Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats Culture Congress California Allow Media Exception adam schiff

Screen grab via C-SPAN.

When it comes to questioning the secretive nature of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s and House Intel Chair Adam Schiff’s so-called “impeachment inquiry” process, Rep. Liz Cheney has not been shy about speaking her mind.

Cheney, who is the GOP Conference Chair, asked Pelosi earlier this month what she knew and when she knew it regarding the Trump/Zelensky call transcript from July. Cheney’s question came in response to comments Pelosi made during a 60 Minutes interview where she stated she knew what was in the transcript before it was okayed for release by the White House.

“This is starting to seem like a political set up,” tweeted Cheney at the time:

As Democrats continue to bang the impeachment drum and top Republicans in the House have gotten louder on questioning why they are being excluded from large parts of the process, Cheney provided a timely reminder for Pelosi and Schiff earlier this week as to an important part of the process they were deliberately overlooking. Here’s what she said:

“I think one of the really important things to recognize about the impeachment effort is the extent to which the materials are being kept in secret not just from the public, but kept in secret from other members.

So, we have had members go down and attempt to read the transcripts, for example Kurt Volker’s testimony and they were denied access.

The Constitution of the United States does not say that the power of impeachment resides with Speaker Pelosi, doesn’t say it resides with the Speaker of the House, doesn’t say that it resides with the Chairman of the Intel Committee. It says it resides with the House of Representatives.

And it is really a shameful miscarriage of their responsibilities and their duties for them to be conducting this exercise in which they will not even share information with members of Congress beyond the select few who they have identified.”

Watch Cheney’s remarks below:

Over to you, Madame Speaker.

——-
— Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 16+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter. –

The post Video: Liz Cheney Reminds Pelosi, Schiff of One Important Thing They’re Forgetting About Impeachment Process appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group LizCheneyScreenGrab-300x189 Video: Liz Cheney Reminds Pelosi, Schiff of One Important Thing They’re Forgetting About Impeachment Process Wyoming washington D.C. Social Media schiff republicans Politics North Carolina Nancy Pelosi Liz Cheney Impeachment of President Trump impeachment Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats Culture Congress California Allow Media Exception adam schiff   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Jan Brewer: Media Treated Me Much Differently than Pelosi When I Pointed a Finger at a President

Westlake Legal Group JanBrewerAPimage-620x317 Jan Brewer: Media Treated Me Much Differently than Pelosi When I Pointed a Finger at a President white house washington D.C. Social Media Politics North Carolina Nancy Pelosi Media journalism jan brewer Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats Culture Congress CNN California Arizona Allow Media Exception

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer announces that she will not seek a third term and will retire at the end of her current term, Wednesday, March 12, 2014, in Glendale, Ariz. (AP Photo/Matt York)

After House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters on Wednesday that President Trump had had a “meltdown” in the middle of a bipartisan meeting on the Syria issue, Trump took to the Twitter machine in an effort to try and prove it was Pelosi and not him who had the meltdown.

Here’s what he tweeted:

Instead of backing down, Pelosi’s staff made the picture he tweeted the header image on her Twitter page:

The media have unquestionably been swooning over the photo ever since. As Newsbusters’ Nicholas Fondacaro notes, MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell and Lester Holt were among the many who were in awe of the supposed symbolism of the image:

Anchor Lester Holt began by touting the image himself. “It was during a contentious White House meeting about the Syria conflict that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi stood up in front of President Trump. The photo instantly becoming a new and powerful symbol of their power struggle,” he said.

Mitchell, a well-documented fangirl of the Clintons, proclaimed the picture was “iconic” and boasted about how it was “released by the White House to diminish the Speaker, she immediately turned it into a badge of courage and her cover photo.”

CNN’s Dana Bash was another who was couldn’t help but gush over the photo, and how Pelosi and her staff “owned” the moment where she “[stood up] … at a table of all men” against Trump:

“Can we do just one more beat on that photo?” Bash asked as the image was onscreen. “Until now, what her staff owned, and what has made her kind of iconic among the Democratic base and even beyond that, is that picture walking out of the White House and putting her sunglasses on. I mean, this makes that look like, you know, not even at all symbolic.”

“I mean, look at that photo of one woman standing up and, you know, giving it to the president of the United States at a table of all men there. I mean, of course she’s going to own that.”

Former Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, a Republican, had a much more different take, noting that when she was photographed pointing a finger at President Obama in 2012, she was treated much differently by the mainstream media:

She’s right. Many media outlets either took a questioning or hostile tone over the image, or showed complete indifference – unlike how the Pelosi picture has been treated.

NBC’s Brian Williams wondered “”Who have you ever seen talking to the President like this?”

NPR headline: Arizona Gov. Brewer Says She ‘Was Not Hostile’ In Meeting With Obama

“Finger-wagging Arizona governor says Obama was the disrespectful one”, wrote the Mercury News.

MSNBC had a poll up on their website that asked the question “Should Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer apologize for pointing her finger in President Obama’s face?”

The Root’s headline on their version of the story was: Arizona Gov Points Finger at Obama in Nasty Face-Off.

The media weren’t the only ones who frowned over Brewer’s actions:

Brewer took flak for her finger-pointing from both the media and the public, who accused her of disrespecting the presidency. More than 12,000 letters flooded her office in the ensuing days, most of which condemned her, calling her “trashy” and “tasteless.” Likening the act to belching at the president, a writer for the Washington Post scolded her, “If a thing is frowned upon in general, it’s even worse to do it to the president in particular.”

But I was told the media “don’t root for a side” or anything:

I am so confused.

——-
— Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 16+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter. –

The post Jan Brewer: Media Treated Me Much Differently than Pelosi When I Pointed a Finger at a President appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group JanBrewerAPimage-300x153 Jan Brewer: Media Treated Me Much Differently than Pelosi When I Pointed a Finger at a President white house washington D.C. Social Media Politics North Carolina Nancy Pelosi Media journalism jan brewer Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats Culture Congress CNN California Arizona Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Breaking: Impeachment witness says he tried to warn about Ukraine influence — with Biden

Westlake Legal Group biden-cfr Breaking: Impeachment witness says he tried to warn about Ukraine influence — with Biden Ukraine-Gate Ukraine The Blog State Department Nancy Pelosi Joe Biden influence peddling hunter biden George Kent Burisma

Impeachment, as it turns out, cuts any number of ways. In their attempt to prove that Donald Trump tried to strongarm Ukraine into digging up dirt on Joe Biden, House Democrats dug some up on their own. The Washington Post reports that a career State Department officer tried to warn officials in the Obama administration about the conflict of interest that Hunter Biden’s work created in Ukraine and with efforts to target corruption. When those warnings reached the Vice President’s office in early 2015, Biden’s team shut them down:

A career State Department official overseeing Ukraine policy told congressional investigators this week that he had raised concerns in early 2015 about then-Vice President Joe Biden’s son serving on the board of a Ukrainian energy company but was turned away by a Biden staffer, according to three people familiar with the testimony.

George Kent, a deputy assistant secretary of state, testified Tuesday that he worried that Hunter Biden’s position at the firm Burisma Holdings would complicate efforts by U.S. diplomats to convey to Ukrainian officials the importance of avoiding conflicts of interest, said the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of confidentiality rules surrounding the deposition.

Kent said he had concerns that Ukrainian officials would view Hunter Biden as a conduit for currying influence with his father, said the people. But when Kent raised the issue with Biden’s office, he was told the then-vice president didn’t have the “bandwidth” to deal with the issue involving his son as his other son, Beau, was battling cancer, said the people familiar with his testimony.

The timing on this is very instructive. Supposedly Biden didn’t have the “bandwidth” in early 2015 to deal with the problem, but by late 2015 Biden was all over it — by his own admission. Last year, Biden bragged to the Council of Foreign Relations about how he’d used the leverage of a billion dollars in US aid in December 2015 to get then-Ukraine president Petro Poroshenko to fire his general prosecutor, over Biden’s dissatisfaction with progress in anti-corruption probes:

BIDEN: Well, I was, not I, but it just happened to be that was the assignment I got. I got all the good ones. And so I got Ukraine. And I remember going over convincing our team, our, others to convincing that we should be providing for loan guarantees. And I went over, try to guess the 12th, 13th time to Kiev, and I was going to, supposed to announce that there was another billion dollar loan guarantee. And I had gotten a commitment from Poroshenko and from Yatsenyuk that they would take action against the state prosecutor, and they didn’t. So they said they had, they were walking out to a press conference, and I said no, I said I’m not going to, we’re not going to give you the billion dollars. They said you have no authority. You’re not the president. The president said. I said call him. I said I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars. I said you’re not getting the billion, and I’m going to be leaving here, and I think it was what, six hours. I looked. I said I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. He got fired.

According to Kent’s testimony, this was months after the State Department career officer warned that Biden’s involvement would create a conflict of interest. Biden’s office, at the very least, would have known that the issue had already come up in the US diplomatic corps, and why wouldn’t it? Biden was pressing to get a prosecutor fired over corruption while his son held a very high-profile position for one of the oligarchs suspected of corruption. Regardless of what Biden intended, what were the Ukrainians supposed to think about Biden’s pressure and his leveraging of US aid over the issue? It’s all but guaranteed that the message wasn’t “please go after my ne’er-do-well son‘s patron.”

Furthermore, the Post interviewed an anonymous Biden aide from that period, who largely defends the former VP on charges of conflicts of interest. However, he also throws some cold water on the excuse Kent was given at the time:

The aide said that Joe Biden was dealing with a lot during Beau Biden’s bout with cancer, but that it had a minimal impact on his work.

“Day to day the vice president was at work and he was pretty focused,” the aide said. “Does that mean it’s inconceivable that someone said, ‘Hey look it’s not the time to raise a family issue?’ I guess it’s conceivable. But I never saw evidence he wasn’t capable of doing the VP role and dealing with his family at the same time.”

In other words, Kent got pushed aside because no one cared at the time about quid pro quos and the appearance of impropriety. Just three years earlier, Biden’s boss had gotten caught on camera and a live mic asking Dmitri Medvedev to back off on contentious issues until after his 2012 election, when he would have “more flexibility” to meet the Russian positions. Medvedev had then helpfully offered to transmit that request to Putin. In 2015, leverage and quid pro quos were apparently all the rage.

House Democrats stepped onto a land mine with Kent. They may step a little more carefully after this, but it raises questions about what kind of witnesses Senate Republicans might call when the trial begins after impeachment — or maybe if after this. George Kent’s little bombshell should have Nancy Pelosi reconsidering whether the alea has truly been iacta’d, and just how much she’s willing to expose the previous administration’s own peccadilloes in their fervor to get revenge over the 2016 election.

The post Breaking: Impeachment witness says he tried to warn about Ukraine influence — with Biden appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group biden-cfr-300x162 Breaking: Impeachment witness says he tried to warn about Ukraine influence — with Biden Ukraine-Gate Ukraine The Blog State Department Nancy Pelosi Joe Biden influence peddling hunter biden George Kent Burisma   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com