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 > Posts tagged "democrats" (Page 8)

Heh: House Republicans Who Stormed SCIF Commit the Ultimate Sin by Enjoying Chick-Fil-A During Sit-In

Westlake Legal Group 1506376_10152375258885101_1784838873_o-620x413 Heh: House Republicans Who Stormed SCIF Commit the Ultimate Sin by Enjoying Chick-Fil-A During Sit-In washington D.C. Social Media Politics Media Impeachment of President Trump Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post democrats Culture Congress Allow Media Exception

Photo via Chick-Fil-A Facebook page.

Nick wrote earlier today about how House Republicans who are frustrated by the secretive nature of the so-called “impeachment inquiry” process decided to stop talking about it and took action, storming the SCIF room where Schiff was conducting his show trial witness tampering witness questioning.

The impeachment hearing was postponed shortly thereafter, while Republicans vowed to wait until they could negotiate a deal with Schiff and Co. to get full access to the hearings and transcripts.

As the Republican sit-in continued on, lunch was ordered, which included pizza for Republicans and journalists alike. Also on the menu?

A big order of Chick-fil-A sandwiches:

I know they weren’t allowed to have their phones in the room, but I would have absolutely loved to have seen a picture of the sandwich bag full of ‘hate chicken’ being passed around. Westlake Legal Group 1f609 Heh: House Republicans Who Stormed SCIF Commit the Ultimate Sin by Enjoying Chick-Fil-A During Sit-In washington D.C. Social Media Politics Media Impeachment of President Trump Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post democrats Culture Congress Allow Media Exception

As to whether or not Republicans were able to make a deal with Schiff on getting more access to impeachment-related documents, I think the answer to that is obvious. The witness questioning resumed once the Republicans who stormed Schiff’s gates had all left – which was around 3 p.m.

No word yet as to whether or not Republicans will try again on Thursday.

——-
— 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 Heh: House Republicans Who Stormed SCIF Commit the Ultimate Sin by Enjoying Chick-Fil-A During Sit-In appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group 1506376_10152375258885101_1784838873_o-300x200 Heh: House Republicans Who Stormed SCIF Commit the Ultimate Sin by Enjoying Chick-Fil-A During Sit-In washington D.C. Social Media Politics Media Impeachment of President Trump Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post democrats Culture Congress Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Stephen Miller: ‘Permanent Bureaucracy is a Mortal Threat to America’

Westlake Legal Group ap-stephen-miller-620x447 Stephen Miller: ‘Permanent Bureaucracy is a Mortal Threat to America’ stephen miller President Trump permanent bureaucracy Marie Yovanovitch Liberal Elitism International Affairs Impeachment of President Trump Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Featured Story elections donald trump democrats corruption Cicero Allow Media Exception Abuse of Power 2020

White House senior policy adviser Stephen Miller speaks during the daily briefing at the White House in Washington, Wednesday, Aug. 2, 2017. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

 

Two thousand years ago, Cicero said that a nation can survives its fools, and even the ambitious, but it cannot survive treason from within.

In a recent interview with the Washington Examiner’s Paul Bedard, Stephen Miller, President Trump’s Senior Policy Adviser, recently uttered similar words. Miller said that “anonymous efforts by anti-Trump federal bureaucrats to thwart the White House agenda through leaks and complaints to friendly reporters and congressional allies are a mortal threat to the American system of government.”

Miller explained:

It is best understood as career federal employees that believe they are under no obligation to honor, respect, or abide by the results of a democratic election. Their view is, ‘If I agree with what voters choose, then I’ll do what they choose. If I disagree with what voters choose, then I won’t, and I’ll continue doing my own thing. So basically it’s heads I win, tails you lose.

If you elect Hillary Clinton, then I’ll implement all of her policies very faithfully, and if I see massive evidence of corruption on Hillary Clinton’s part, then I’ll keep it all a secret. If you elect a candidate I disagree with, then I’ll lie, I’ll leak, I’ll cheat, I’ll smear, I’ll attack, I’ll persecute, and I will refuse to implement, and I will obstruct at every single step of the way.

We’ve made clear that your leaks will backfire and your sabotage will fail, and we’ll simply implement the policy doubly. Not only will you not change the outcome, but the more that you try to leak and disrupt, the more determined the president will be in his course to accomplish that which he was sent here to do.

The same people who made wrong judgment calls in Iraq, with respect to strategy in Afghanistan, Libya, Egypt, too … the people who made all these decisions now are so utterly convinced that they alone know what the right policy is.

Never has someone occupied the Oval Office who is more undeterred and undaunted in executing the task that he was brought here and has pledged to execute.

A lot of us thought, if you go back many years before Donald Trump ever declared for president, we might never live to see the day when somebody would have the audacity to promise to fundamentally change a broken status quo then get to Washington and proceed to execute on every single thing that he promised to do no matter what was thrown his way. It is truly a miracle to behold.

The most obvious recent example of this has been played out on center stage by the permanent bureaucrats of the State Department, most of whom despise Trump. The majority of them supported Hillary Clinton. Many (if not most) disapprove of Trump’s policies and some have actively worked against his agenda.

They forgot what they were hired for. I imagine that happens after spending decades in government service. Needless to say, it shouldn’t matter if they agree or disagree with any particular administration’s policy. They are there to implement the policies.

The first act of vengeance by the diplomatic community against the President occurred shortly after he had been inaugurated. Trump signed an executive order called “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States,” better known as the muslim travel ban which most liberals objected to. 1,000 U.S. diplomats signed a dissent cable opposing the order. Acting Attorney General Sally Yates took it a step further, and refused to defend it. Trump immediately fired her, as he should have. And, unsurprisingly, DOJ official Andrew Weissmann of Special Counsel fame, sent Yates an email congratulating her for resisting the order.

Last weekend, Politico published an article entitled “The Revenge of the State Department,” which was, as you would expect, sympathetic to the diplomatic corps. It begins, “They’ve been derided as a “deep state,” slurred as “Obama holdovers,” threatened with draconian budget cuts and told President Donald Trump doesn’t even need them. Now, America’s diplomats are taking their revenge.”

The author believes they are perfectly justified in their behavior. In fact, these people are being praised by their State Department colleagues and “their allies in the broader foreign policy community are quietly hailing them as heroes.”

A Former U.S. ambassador spoke to Politico and said, “People are fed up. There’s a deep well of resentment that’s just bubbled toward the top.”

These diplomats clearly disagree with everything this President stands for and they disapprove of the changes his administration has made at the State Department. Former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, is resentful that she was recalled two months early from her post in Kiev. And these are now the “witnesses” testifying in the Democrats’ circus which they call the impeachment inquiry.

How long can any government, or company or even any family, survive this kind of defiance? It’s remarkable that the President has been able to withstand the constant onslaught of attacks. That he’s been able to accomplish anything is miraculous.

The State Department is just one agency in a large, swollen government that Trump will likely trim if he wins a second term. He should try to push through term limits for both lawmakers and non-elected officials as well. He needs to bust up the deep state.

Stephen Miller is spot on when he says that permanent bureaucracy is a mortal threat to America.

Cicero knew what he was talking about 2,000 years ago.

The post Stephen Miller: ‘Permanent Bureaucracy is a Mortal Threat to America’ appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group ap-stephen-miller-300x216 Stephen Miller: ‘Permanent Bureaucracy is a Mortal Threat to America’ stephen miller President Trump permanent bureaucracy Marie Yovanovitch Liberal Elitism International Affairs Impeachment of President Trump Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Featured Story elections donald trump democrats corruption Cicero Allow Media Exception Abuse of Power 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Caught: NY Times Conveniently Runs Interference for Hillary Clinton in Her Battle With Tulsi Gabbard

Westlake Legal Group hillary-clinton-pointing-harvard-620x317 Caught: NY Times Conveniently Runs Interference for Hillary Clinton in Her Battle With Tulsi Gabbard tulsi gabbard Social Media Politics NY Times North Carolina New York Times New York Media journalism Hillary Clinton Hawaii Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post elections democrats Culture Congress Campaigns Allow Media Exception 2020 Elections 2020

Hillary Clinton points to the audience as she is introduced at Harvard University in Cambridge, Mass., Friday, May 25, 2018. Harvard University’s Radcliffe Institute honored Clinton with the 2018 Radcliffe Medal. (AP Photo/Charles Krupa)

Last week, Bonchie wrote about about how failed 2016 Democratic nominee for president Hillary Clinton told former Obama adviser David Plouffe in a podcast last week that Rep. Tulsi Gabbard and 2016 Green party nominee Jill Stein were both “Russian assets.”

Prior to making that claim, Clinton also asserted that “I’m not making any predictions but I think they’ve got their eye on somebody who is currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be the third-party candidate,” which was a clear reference to Gabbard even though she did not mention the 2020 presidential candidate by name during the podcast.

It was widely reported Friday morning by multiple journalists on Twitter, including the Washington Post’s Aaron Blake, that the “they” Hillary referred to were the Russians. Here’s what Blake and others tweeted:

Clinton’s spokesman Nick Merrill was even asked about her comments to confirm it was Gabbard who she was referring to. He did:

In addition to an opinion piece on Hillary vs. Tulsi, the New York Times also published a straight news (heh) report about Clinton’s remarks and initially reported that Hillary was referring to the Russians as being the ones who were “grooming” Gabbard to be a third party candidate.

But sometime between last Friday and Tuesday, they changed their story, and now report it was “Republicans” Hillary meant, not the Russians. How do we know this? Through Merrill, in a series of tweets, the first two of which note the so-called error and correction:

Because I don’t trust anything that comes from Merrill or anyone else on Team Clinton, I searched for a transcript so I could read what she said in context. Politifact, thankfully, had it:

Plouffe: “But one of the reasons [Trump] was able to win is the third party vote.”

Clinton: “Right.”

Plouffe: “And what’s clear to me, you mentioned, you know, he’s going to just lie. … He’s going to say, whoever our nominee is, ‘will ban hamburgers and steaks and you can’t fly and infanticide’ and people believe this. So, how concerned are you about that? For me, so much of this does come down to the win number. If he has to get 49 or even 49.5 in a bunch of…”

Clinton: “He can’t do that.”

Plouffe: “…which I don’t think he can… So he’s going to try and drive the people not to vote for him but just to say, ‘you know, you can’t vote for them either.’ And that seems to be, I think, to the extent that I can define a strategy, their key strategy right now.”

Clinton: “Well, I think there’s going to be two parts and I think it’s going to be the same as 2016: ‘Don’t vote for the other guy. You don’t like me? Don’t vote for the other guy because the other guy is going to do X, Y and Z or the other guy did such terrible things and I’m going to show you in these, you know, flashing videos that appear and then disappear and they’re on the dark web, and nobody can find them, but you’re going to see them and you’re going to see that person doing these horrible things.’”

“They’re also going to do third party again. And I’m not making any predictions but I think they’ve got their eye on somebody who is currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be the third party candidate. She’s the favorite of the Russians. They have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of supporting her so far, and that’s assuming Jill Stein will give it up. Which she might not, ’cause she’s also a Russian asset.”

Plouffe: (Inaudible)

Clinton: “Yeah, she’s a Russian asset, I mean, totally.

“And so, they know they can’t win without a third party candidate and, so, I don’t know who it’s going to be it but I will guarantee you they’ll have a vigorous third party challenge in the key states that they most need it.”

Understandably, it’s hard to tell whether Hillary is talking about Trump and Republicans or the Russians when she refers to “they” because she uses the terms interchangeably often, but it simply does not make sense that Merrill confirmed Friday she was talking about Russians grooming Gabbard but then rushed to Twitter a few days later to correct the record.

In fact, the “correction” is just a little too convenient for my liking. It’s almost as though it was a coordinated effort. Considering how closely the Clinton camp monitors the media, it is not outside the realm of possibility at all that they pitched a fit to the NYT to the point the paper changed it on their behalf.

Just for purposes of discussion, let’s say Hillary Clinton really was referring to Republicans as “grooming” Gabbard.

1) It’s still highly insulting to Gabbard. Even though she doesn’t view Republicans as the enemy, she’s also a proud Democrat and by suggesting Republicans were “grooming” her to be a third party candidate means Clinton thinks Gabbard, who served her country in Iraq, would sell out her party and what she stands for in order to give Trump the advantage in the general election.

2) Plus, Clinton, who is delusional enough to think Trump and Republicans colluded with the Russians in 2016, thinks they are still “working together” now to “steal” 2020. So by saying Republicans are “grooming” Gabbard, she’s saying Gabbard is working with people who allegedly are getting assistance from a foreign country to “steal” our elections.

The “correction” the paper made does not change the despicable nature of what she said.

3) Hillary Clinton unquestionably called Gabbbard a “Russian asset.” That’s just as disgusting.

The bottom line is that Democrats including Hillary Clinton have banged the “Russia” drum since 2016. The only difference now is that she’s implicating members of her own party in some supposed new Republican scheme to steal 2020.

Someone needs to stage an intervention with her. Seriously. This is just nuts.

——-
— 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 Caught: NY Times Conveniently Runs Interference for Hillary Clinton in Her Battle With Tulsi Gabbard appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group hillary-clinton-pointing-harvard-300x153 Caught: NY Times Conveniently Runs Interference for Hillary Clinton in Her Battle With Tulsi Gabbard tulsi gabbard Social Media Politics NY Times North Carolina New York Times New York Media journalism Hillary Clinton Hawaii Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post elections democrats Culture Congress Campaigns Allow Media Exception 2020 Elections 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

The Elizabeth Warren Hype Train Begins to Go Off the Tracks

Westlake Legal Group warren-scowl-620x317 The Elizabeth Warren Hype Train Begins to Go Off the Tracks Race primary polls Politics New Hampshire Joe Biden Hyped Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story falling Elizabeth Warren Election democrats Allow Media Exception 2020

FILE – In this May 18, 2019, file photo, Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., speaks at a house party campaign stop in Rochester, N.H. Rising disagreement among congressional Democrats over whether to pursue impeachment of President Donald Trump has had little effect on the party’s presidential candidates, who mostly are avoiding calls to start such an inquiry. (AP Photo/Robert F. Bukaty, File)

The media love Elizabeth Warren. She’s everything they want in a candidate. Someone to whisper sweet nothings into their ears and make them feel really smart. She’s got plans, the right amount of shrill in her voice, and is just focus grouped enough to get them excited.

This love affair has led to an incredible amount of hype surrounding the Massachusetts Senator, who’s only accomplishment appears to be supporting an unconstitutional agency in the CFPB. It’s gotten to the point where she is routinely described as the presumptive front-runner. To be fair, I’ve bagged on Joe Biden to the benefit of Elizabeth Warren a bit in the past few months as well. I mean, he’s Joe Biden.

Following the most recent debate though, where Warren stumbled repeatedly when pressed about raising middle class taxes, we are seeing some problems emerge.

For starters, she’s still nowhere near the national front-runner.

Not only is Warren behind by double digits, Biden is enjoying his biggest lead since April, a time when it was all but assumed he’d be the nominee. There are other polls as well showing bad news for Warren. Emerson released their latest offering and she’s 6 points behind Biden. Worse, she’s 4 points behind Sanders, who just suffered a heart attack a month ago.

In fact, in the last seven polls published, six of them have Warren down by at least 6 points. The only poll which continues to show her close is YouGov, which has held an incredible house effect for Warren throughout the primaries. You can view all these results at RCP here.

But perhaps she’s leading in the early states? In New Hampshire, yes, but that’s to be expected. In Iowa, Nevada, South Carolina, and California, she’s behind Biden still. If Biden wins two of those four states, he’ll enter the southern primaries all but guaranteed to clean up, leaving Warren no real path.

It should be noted that Warren hasn’t simply been a mirage. There was a time when she was leading in three of those four states depending on what polls you cite. Something has changed lately though and I think it’s easy to explain.

The last debate exposed Warren for who she is. She’s inauthentic, whiny, and way too rehearsed. Democrats love her and the media swoon when she’s reading off her talking points. When she’s pressed and shows no ability to answer real questions, she suddenly is revealed for the weak candidate she is (she consistently polls worse against Trump than Biden or Sanders). There’s also the fact that her policy platform is a socialist’s dream, complete with government controlled daycare and healthcare programs that cost 3/4 of the current budget. That’s great in New York, not so great in most of the rest of the country.

I think there was a point where moderate Democrats (moderate in that context at least), who still make up the majority of their party, looked at Warren and thought she might not be so bad. At least she didn’t have blood squirting out of her eye, right? But the more she rolls out her policies and the more she’s pressed on them, the worse she looks. In some ways, it resembles the calm before Kamala Harris’ fall. You can’t hide forever behind canned lines and media plaudits. No matter how many time people call you the “real front-runner,” at some point you’ve got to actually, you know, take over as the real front-runner. Warren isn’t doing that.

For now, she’s still in the thick of things, but the longer the status quo drags on, the tougher it will be for her. The hype train is beginning to go off the tracks.

————————————————

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 The Elizabeth Warren Hype Train Begins to Go Off the Tracks appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group ElizabethWarrenAPimage-300x153 The Elizabeth Warren Hype Train Begins to Go Off the Tracks Race primary polls Politics New Hampshire Joe Biden Hyped Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story falling Elizabeth Warren Election democrats Allow Media Exception 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

A Writer for ‘Teen Vogue’ Tries to Trademark ‘Fake News’ so Trump Can’t Say it Anymore

Westlake Legal Group trump-fist-620x317 A Writer for ‘Teen Vogue’ Tries to Trademark ‘Fake News’ so Trump Can’t Say it Anymore Uncategorized Teen Vogue Politics Media Front Page Stories florida pro chapter of the society of professional journalists fake news emily bloch donald trump democrats Allow Media Exception

President Donald Trump gestures towards members on the media on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, Thursday, Sept. 26, 2019, after returning from United Nations General Assembly. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

 

 

Teen Vogue isn’t exactly a bastion of conservatism.

If you’d like to see some credentials, the magazine aimed at young girls came under fire in 2017 when it published a tutorial on anal sex (here).

And there’ve also been these RedState peaks:

WATCH: YouTube And ‘Teen Vogue’ Attack Thanksgiving (And You)

Ghoul Alert: ‘Teen Vogue’ Instructs Young Girls On How To Get Abortions – Without Parental Consent

Teen Vogue Is Now Promoting Prostitution To Its Young Female Readers

Science: Teen Vogue Declares There Is No Such Thing As Biological Sex Because Reasons

Those are, of course, more cultural than political, but they surely leave you unsurprised that a writer for TV is less than a fan of Donald J. Trump.

And Emily Bloch has a plan: Trademark the term “fake news” so the Commander-in-Chief can’t say it anymore.

Via an article published in the teen mag Tuesday, she announced that the Florida Pro Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists has applied for the trademark.

Here’s what Emily — who’s president of the group — had to say:

Along with several of my colleagues, we’re trying to stop Trump from calling everything he doesn’t like “fake news” in a way that even a businessman as self-obsessed as Trump can understand: trademark law. The Florida Pro Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists— one of America’s oldest and largest journalism advocacy groups — applied to trademark the term “fake news” with the intended goal of curbing Trump’s frequent use of it to discredit stories he doesn’t like.

She doesn’t know if she’ll be able to make the trademark happen, but she can at least inundate the White House with letters:

It’s uncertain that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office will grant our request, but as long as this trademark’s pending, we’ll use this opportunity to send cease and desist letters to frequent abusers of the term — including Trump, of course. He should’ve already received our first one today.

And she’ll get people to thinkin’:

For what it’s worth, we don’t expect the trademark to get approved. No one can really trademark a generic term like “fake news,” which started being used long before Trump even took office. What we do hope is that this idea is outrageous enough to get people to stop and think about what fake news is, and what it means to them.

As for being able to trademark a “generic term,” didn’t Paris Hilton trademark “That’s hot”? And as for it having been used for a long time, Gene Simmons laid legal claim to the money bag.

Lastly, as for it leading people to a revelation, it won’t. Whatever Americans already think about “fake news,” they’re going to continue thinking it.

But Emily believes you’re all confused.

She explains in a sample letter to Trump:

Referring to factual stories that are critical of your administration as FAKE NEWS (TM pending) is indeed trademark infringement. You may not be aware, but your misuse of the term FAKE NEWS (TM pending) has greatly confused the American people and shaken their trust in the journalism that’s so vital to our democracy.”

It seems to be a hip thing when decrying The Donald to reference the preservation of democracy. That strikes me as odd, since the criticism seems to never relate to representation by vote, which, of course, is what democracy is.

Or maybe I just can’t take a joke, which is what the the letters to the President will be:

Since it’s clear Trump has no plans to stop saying “fake news,” anytime soon — just look at his recent Twitter history — I’m personally looking forward to sending letters and tweets his way anytime he violates our pending trademark.

“If you fail to comply with our request, we may pursue legal action,” we wrote in the closing of our first letter to Trump. “But of course, this is satire — which is very different than what you refer to as ‘fake news.’ It might be asking too much for you to realize the difference.”

Like recognizing the difference between trusting the media and being able to vote?

Oh, well. I wish them luck in their trademark pursuits. But there is bad news: If Trump were to stop saying it, he’d just say something different that means the same thing. It’s the meaning of the words that matter, not the words themselves.

And people don’t trust the media, not because they’re mindless goons following the syllables of their Supreme Leader, but because of what the media actually says and does.

And the media trying to keep Donald Trump from saying something bad about…the media will — guess what — only make people not trust the media.

Footshot, complete.

As for the root of the fake news problem, perhaps the source lies somewhere in the vicinity of this:


-ALEX

 

Relevant RedState links in this article: here and here.

See 3 more pieces from me:

A Television Icon Laments America’s Divide, But There’s A Greater Lesson – A Forgotten One We Learned Long Ago

Beto Continues His Mad Dash For Abject Failure, Calls On Banks To Refuse Credit Card Use For 2nd Amendment Purchases

The NRA Pulls No Punches In Its Strike Against Walmart’s New Anti-Gun Policy

Find all my RedState work here.

And please follow Alex Parker on Twitter and Facebook.

The post A Writer for ‘Teen Vogue’ Tries to Trademark ‘Fake News’ so Trump Can’t Say it Anymore appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group trump-fist-300x153 A Writer for ‘Teen Vogue’ Tries to Trademark ‘Fake News’ so Trump Can’t Say it Anymore Uncategorized Teen Vogue Politics Media Front Page Stories florida pro chapter of the society of professional journalists fake news emily bloch donald trump democrats Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

GOP Now Holding Sit-In For Impeachment Transparency, Democrats Having a Meltdown

Westlake Legal Group Screen-Shot-2019-10-23-at-12.11.18-PM GOP Now Holding Sit-In For Impeachment Transparency, Democrats Having a Meltdown sit-in republicans impeachment Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats Conservatives Congress Allow Media Exception Abuse of Power

Screenshot from this video

Earlier today, Republicans stormed the closed door impeachment proceeding being held in the Capitol basement.

Democrats were questioning Defense Department official Laura Cooper behind closed doors.

But Republicans decided enough was enough of the lack of transparency in how Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) has been conducting the proceedings and the refusal to hold a formal vote for an impeachment inquiry.

So dozens of them held a press conference in front of the hearing room and then several of them stormed the room, stopping the hearing from proceeding.

But then, they refused to leave until the Democrats came to an agreement with them about transparency.

While they were not allowed to have phones in the SCIF, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) sent out a message in accordance with the rules of a SCIF through a secure line.

But since the hearing was stopped and Schiff had spirited away the witness there was nothing that they would have been violating with phones in any event. The first question they need to ask of the witness when they can is if she was asked by Schiff to say anything or did he try to influence her in any way.

Republicans ordered pizza for the reporters covering the drama outside, telling them they were going to be awhile.

Of course, this made Democrats flip out. Democrats claimed that Republicans were obstructing the process and had violated the SCIF.

Meanwhile, Democrats seem to have forgotten about their sit-in for gun control,which of course the media lauded as proof of their dedication.

Democrats don’t seem to have counted on Republicans fighting back.

The post GOP Now Holding Sit-In For Impeachment Transparency, Democrats Having a Meltdown appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group Screen-Shot-2019-10-23-at-12.11.18-PM-300x170 GOP Now Holding Sit-In For Impeachment Transparency, Democrats Having a Meltdown sit-in republicans impeachment Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats Conservatives Congress Allow Media Exception Abuse of Power   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

UPDATE: Here’s an Even Hilariously Larger Number of Democrats Claiming the Clinton Impeachment Was a “Lynching”

Westlake Legal Group Bill-Clinton-with-cigar UPDATE: Here’s an Even Hilariously Larger Number of Democrats Claiming the Clinton Impeachment Was a “Lynching” the washington post The New York Times Politics Lynching lynch mob lynch impeachment Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story donald trump democrats Congress Allow Media Exception

Apparently, when I jokingly said yesterday that “every Democrat in existence” had described Bill Clinton’s impeachment as a “lynching,” I was underselling matters. Go figure.

Overnight, RedState received dozens more examples of the term being thrown out to defend the former President, who I’m pretty sure is a white guy. More hilariously, many of the legacy media outlets that feigned outrage the past few days unsurprisingly chose to circle the wagons around Clinton, using the terms lynch, lynching, lynch mob, etc. to describe what was happening in 1998.

I’m not going to post every new example I’ve got because it’s a hilariously large number, but here’s some highlights.

Rep. Danny Davis (D-IL) Called The Impeachment Of President Clinton A “Lynching.” “So, Mr. Speaker, I will not vote for this nightmare before Christmas. I will not vote for this lynching in the people’s House. I will vote against these resolutions.” (Danny Davis, Congressional Record)

Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY) Called The Impeachment Proceedings Of President Clinton A “Lynch Mob.” REP. CHARLES RANGEL (D-NY): “Whether it is the FBI files, whether it is Whitewater, whether it is discussing something that Hillary has done, or whether it is Lewinsky, the whole idea is a lynch mob mentality that says this man has to go.” (Charles Rangel, Congressional Record)

Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) Again Compared Impeachment To “Lynchings” In The South. REP. CHARLIE RANGEL: “You better weigh the rules very carefully.  There’s been a whole lot of lynchings done…in South where they followed the rules but they knew they were going to lynch the guy in the beginning.” (Rep. Charlie Rangel, “1998: The Year In Review,” CNN)

Congressman Robert Brady (D-PA) Referred To Impeachment Proceedings Against President Bill Clinton As A “Political Lynching.” REP. ROBERT BRADY: “I’m not going to talk about Constitutional Law, except to say that I don’t see how the President can be removed from office in this case even if the charges could be proven. While President Clinton is guilty of bad behavior and lack of moral judgment in this issue, he didn’t put the country in jeopardy. Instead, I’ll tell you about the political lynching that’s been going on, how we got here, and why we can’t seem to get back to the issues of the people of America.” (Robert Brady, Congressional Record)

Rep. Major Owens (D-NY) Referred To The Clinton Impeachment Effort As A “Religious Lynching.” REP. MAJOR OWENS: “As a member of Congress I am sorry that there is an escalating hysteria that may lead to the religious lynching of a great president. President Clinton has gone further than he should have been asked to go in offering a public statement about his intimate personal life.” (Major Owens, Congressional Record)

Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-RI) Described The Clinton Impeachment As A “Political Lynching.” REP. PATRICK KENNEDY: “Representative Patrick J. Kennedy, Democrat of Rhode Island, a nephew of the late President John F. Kennedy, spoke of ‘a political lynching…’” (R.W. Apple, “With Partisan Rancor, A Bitter House Debates The President’s Impeachment, The New York Times)

Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) Referred To The Clinton Impeachment As A “Political Lynching.” “Speaking just off the House floor, Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-3rd District, decried the Republican effort to impeach the president, charging that it was an attempt to undo the results of the past two elections. ‘This has been a partisan lynching,’ she said. ‘They have hijacked the Constitution to impeach our agenda and to impeach our ideas.’”  (David Lightman and Michael Remez, “Clinton Impeached,” Hartford Courant)

House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt Invoked The Term Lynch Mob To Describe Impeachment. REP. RICHARD GEPHARDT: “This is a sacred process. This goes to the heart of our democracy. This is not a second election. This is not politics. This is not spinning. This is not polling. This is not a lynch mob. This is not a witch-hunt. This is not trying to find facts to support our already-reached conclusions. This is a constitutional test.” (Richard Gephardt,Congressional Record)

In 1998, Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) Referred To Talk Of Impeachment As “Irresponsible,” “Absurd,” And Reflecting A “Lynch-Mob Mentality.”“The ranking Democratic member of the panel, Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, said talk of impeachment was irresponsible and absurd and reflected a “lynch-mob mentality.’ ‘Let’s consider what we don’t know,” said Conyers of taped conversations with Lewinsky. ‘None of us know what is on the tapes. Even if there are incriminating statements, none of us know whether any of the statements are reliable.” (“Patrick Sloyan, “The Specter Of Watergate / Beset President, Wary Congress”)

In 1998, Rep. Tim Roemer (D-IN) Compared Clinton’s Impeachment To A “Lynch Mob.” “Rep. Tim Roemer (D-Ind.) said an inquiry is warranted. He first voted for the Democratic alternative because it provided a time frame, but once it was defeated, he supported the Republican measure. ‘I don’t think the high threshold necessary for impeaching a president has been reached’ so far, he said, adding that the inquiry must be fair. ‘The distinction between a lynch mob and a constitutional inquiry is politics.’”  (“Deborah Barfield and Elaine S. Povich, “31 Democrats Back GOP / Break With Party, See Need For Unlimited Probe”)

James Carville Referred To Ken Starr As “The Leader Of This Nasty Little Lynch Mob.”  (James Carville, And The Horse He Rode In On: The People V. Kenneth Starr)

I’m gonna stop there because I think we all get the point.

It didn’t stop with Democrat Congressional members either. The media were right there to parrot their rhetoric, as they always are.

In An Op-Ed By Frank Rich In The New York Times, Called The Impeachment Proceedings Of President Clinton A Lynch Mob Due To The Anti-Clinton Members Of Congress Being White Southerners. “If nothing else, this is a measure of how deeply blacks still fear that our legal machinery can be stacked in favor of a lynch mob. And it’s hardly a mindless argument. The most rabid Clinton-haters in Congress are white Southerners, led by Bob Barr, who has spoken before the racist Council of Conservative Citizens. An impeachment trial’s jury of 100 senators will be whites only.” (Frank Rich, “Journal; Let It Bleed,” The New York Times)

A New York Times Op-ed, By Bob Herbert, Referred To Impeachment Proceedings As A Lynch Mob. “Forget about the will of the people, the democratic process and the good of the country. The extremists in the Republican Party are trying to bludgeon their way to an impeachment that hardly anybody wants and nobody needs. If the Government and perhaps even the economy are thrown into a tailspin as a result — well, so be it. The fanatics of the right are willing to pay any price, bear any burden, to hammer the man they hate above all others, Bill Clinton. I’m no champion of the President, but I know a lynch mob when I see one.” (Bob Herbert, “In America; The Capitol Hill Mob,” The New York Times)

A New York Times Op-ed, By Maureen Dowd, Referred To America’s Dislike Of Lynch Mobs When Discussing Clinton Impeachment.The Clintons attack Mr. Starr to deflect attention from the President’s immoral behavior. They appeal to decent American impulses — we do not like lynch mobs, we do not like hate-mongering, we do not like women who rat out girl friends, we do not like Big Brother peeking through bedroom windows. The Clintons elicit our public-spirited impulses and use them for their private political gain. But the choices they ask us to make are false ones. You can think the notion of impeachment is ludicrous and still think that Mr. Clinton has acted with monstrous selfishness.” (Maureen Dowd, Op-ed, “Liberties; Saturday Night Bill,” The New York Times)

In An Op-ed In The New York Times, William Safire Described The Bork Hearings As A “Lynching.” “Every liberal pressure group in Washington was patting itself on the back. Senators Joe Biden and Ted Kennedy, champions of integrity and protectors of womanhood, were congratulating each other on their triumph in turning the Bork hearings into the personal vilification and public lynching of a proponent of judicial restraint. The media gathered at the White House for the surrender and humiliation they had been predicting for weeks.” (William Safire, “ESSAY; Judge Bork’s Victory,” The New York Times)

And that’s just The New York Times. What about The Washington Post?

A Washington Post Op-ed, By Elizabeth Drew, Claimed That Clinton Impeachment Was Currently Threatening To Look Like A Lynching. “The Republicans don’t seem to realize what a dangerous game they’re playing, near- and long-term. To begin with, impeachment has to be bipartisan if it is to have legitimacy. And it can’t look like a lynching, which it is currently threatening to do. The Democrats were engaging in a bit of crocodile-ism in their show of outrage that documents and the famous tape were being released: Some among them, including the former inquisitor John Dingell, urged the Democrats to not let the Republicans control the materials and leak them as they chose.” (Elizabeth Drew, Op-ed, “Why Clinton Will Be Impeached, The Washington Post)

A Washington Post Op-ed, By Richard Cohen, Claimed “The Republicans Are Trying To Lynch Clinton” Regarding Campaign Fund-Raising. “The whole thing is a study in disproportion, in a madness that, in other places, would entail an examination of the water supply. Campaign financing badly needs reform but, rather than do that, congressional Republicans are trying to lynch Clinton and Gore for what, it appears, is their most serious offense: winning the last election. No independent counsel is going to change that.” (Richard Cohen, Op-ed, “Who Needs An Independent Counsel?,” The Washington Post)

What’s the media’s response to all this? That it’s different of course.

Makes sense. It’s not like the term lynch wasn’t historically charged 21 years ago. The awful things done to black Americans were not new revelations at the time. So why was it ok then, but not now? Screaming Orange Man Bad isn’t much of an answer, even though the Post tries really hard to make it one.

Here’s the reality. We just live in stupider times. Back in the 90’s, people simply didn’t get up in arms like they do today over the use of metaphors and analogies. The use of the term lynch to describe political battles is not new. It’s not even that controversial and it doesn’t suddenly become so because Trump.

If someone thinks that people should not use the term lynch outside of the Jim Crow era context, that’s fine. There’s nothing wrong with trying to be sensitive to that. But is it really that big of a deal? Was it worth two straight days of breathless coverage and dozens of op-eds?

I’d posit not, and the fact that Democrats and the media found it be perfectly acceptable when defending Clinton’s impeachment tells us all we need to know. This was nothing but partisan rancor and now they are scrambling to justify their hypocrisy.

————————————————

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 UPDATE: Here’s an Even Hilariously Larger Number of Democrats Claiming the Clinton Impeachment Was a “Lynching” appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group clowncar-300x160 UPDATE: Here’s an Even Hilariously Larger Number of Democrats Claiming the Clinton Impeachment Was a “Lynching” the washington post The New York Times Politics Lynching lynch mob lynch impeachment Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story donald trump democrats Congress Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Democrat Asks Mark Zuckerberg a Series of Bizarre Identity Question During Clown Show of a Hearing

Westlake Legal Group Capture-11 Democrat Asks Mark Zuckerberg a Series of Bizarre Identity Question During Clown Show of a Hearing Social Media Politics Mark Zuckerberg LGBT Front Page Stories Diversity democrats Allow Media Exception Al Green

Congressional hearings can be chock full of ridiculous questions, like whether or not Guam will tip over because of overpopulation.

During Wednesday’s hearing with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Democrats didn’t disappoint, specifically Texas Rep. Al Green.

What was already known to be a dog and pony show of a hearing got more than bizarre when Green’s turn to grill Zuckerberg came around. In his very low and slow voice, Green began by asking about the “Libra Project,” which is Facebook’s attempt at starting up their own cryptocurrency.

His question had almost nothing to do with the goal of the project itself instead focused on the social justice aspect of who was working on it. That may have come as no surprise, given that California Rep. Maxine Waters took the same line of questioning.

Green asked Zuckerberg to confirm whether or not multiple corporations were working on the Libra Project. Zuckerberg confirmed it, adding that 21 different companies and non-profit groups were in on it.

That’s when Green broke out the clown questions.

“Of the 21, how many are headed by women?” asked Green.

Why Zuckerberg was expected to have this information locked away in his brain for a moment just like this is beyond me, and Zuckerberg politely informed Green that he doesn’t have that information off the top of his head, but that he could get that information for him.

“One would assume you would know who heads these corporations that are going to be running this global company,” said Green.

“How many of them are minorities, Mr. Zuckerberg,” Green continued.

Once again, Zuckerberg answered that he didn’t know off the top of his head. Seemingly feeling that he had Zuckerberg pushed into a corner, Green pushed forward.

“Are there any members of the LGBTQ-plus community associated with this association Mr. Zuckerberg,” asked Green.

Green clarified quickly that he meant those who are identifying themselves openly as members of the LGBT community. He quickly moved on to accusing the Libra Project of being run by primarily white men.

What any of this has to do with the Libra Project isn’t exactly clear. It would seem that both Waters and Green are of the mind that they can somehow paint this project as racist, sexist, and homophobic. What someone’s race, sex, or sexuality have to do with their ability to run a cryptocurrency company wasn’t exactly discussed in detail.

But what really stood out was that Green wanted Zuckerberg to identify LGBT members of the team. Again, Zuckerberg knowing that off the top of his head is already a pretty ridiculous thing to expect, but more than that, Zuckerberg — and possibly other CEOs who may be faced with a Democrat firing line — to keep track of who is and isn’t gay within their working groups.

That’s not exactly everyone’s business, to begin with, least of all Al Green’s. It’s also not something CEO’s should really have to worry about. CEO’s should be hiring based on whether or not a person can do a job, and do it well. Green seems to believe that talent and ability mean nothing in the face of someone’s identity.

Is Green suggesting that Zuckerberg include “are you a homosexual” among the questions asked when it comes to choosing who he hires or groups he works with?

But I’m willing to bet it’s only certain identities. I’d doubt very much Green would give the same line of questioning to anyone who primarily hires minorities or LGBT people.

The post Democrat Asks Mark Zuckerberg a Series of Bizarre Identity Question During Clown Show of a Hearing appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group Capture-11-300x171 Democrat Asks Mark Zuckerberg a Series of Bizarre Identity Question During Clown Show of a Hearing Social Media Politics Mark Zuckerberg LGBT Front Page Stories Diversity democrats Allow Media Exception Al Green   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Biden Apologizes for Use of the Term ‘Lynching,’ But Somehow Makes It Even Worse

Westlake Legal Group JoeBidenAPimage-1 Biden Apologizes for Use of the Term ‘Lynching,’ But Somehow Makes It Even Worse Trump Lynching impeachment Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats clinton biden Allow Media Exception

Democratic presidential candidate former Vice President Joe Biden speaks during a campaign event at Keene State College in Keene, N.H., Saturday, Aug. 24, 2019. (AP Photo/Michael Dwyer)

Media and Democrats flipped out yesterday over President Donald Trump using the term “lynching” in describing the Democratic effort trying to remove him from office.

“Impeachment is not ‘lynching,’ it is part of our Constitution,” Joe Biden ranted. “Our country has a dark, shameful history with lynching, and to even think about making this comparison is abhorrent. It’s despicable.”

Of course, then it was revealed that virtually every Democrat used the term to defend Bill Clinton. Even CNN, incredibly, used the term in describing the questioning of Hillary Clinton on Benghazi.

If ever there was a wrong usage of the term, that would be it.

And of course, despite deploring the term yesterday, Joe Biden also used it to defend Bill Clinton. Whoops.

He apparently forgot all about how despicable and abhorrent he was then.

But now he’s backtracking on his comments then and apologizing for his use of the term.

“This wasn’t the right word to use and I’m sorry about that,” Biden said. “Trump on the other hand chose his words deliberately today in his use of the word lynching and continues to stoke racial divides in this country daily.”

So wait, he didn’t chose his words deliberately when he said it back in 1998?

Twitchy picks up on some of the stunned responses.

And this guy wants to be president? Yikes.

The post Biden Apologizes for Use of the Term ‘Lynching,’ But Somehow Makes It Even Worse appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group JoeBidenAPimage-1-300x153 Biden Apologizes for Use of the Term ‘Lynching,’ But Somehow Makes It Even Worse Trump Lynching impeachment Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats clinton biden Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Breaking: Dozens of Republicans Storm Schiff’s Closed Impeachment Proceeding

Westlake Legal Group Screen-Shot-2019-10-23-at-12.07.41-PM Breaking: Dozens of Republicans Storm Schiff’s Closed Impeachment Proceeding republicans Impeachment of President Trump impeachment Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post due process donald trump democrats Congress Allow Media Exception Abuse of Power

Screenshot from this video

Finally!

Republicans are fighting back against the ridiculous Schiff Star Chamber “impeachment hearings.”

Democrats led by Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) have been holding hearings and questioning witnesses in private and then leaking out what they think is helpful to their narrative, while holding back that which is helpful to the president. They’ve prevented the public and Republicans from knowing everything that’s going on and haven’t even afforded witnesses such as those from the State Department the right to bring in State Department lawyers to determine if there is any inappropriate (classified) material being discussed, according to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

This, despite having taken no formal vote by the House to even hold an impeachment inquiry or even stating what the alleged offense is that the president is supposed to have committed that would qualify for impeachment.

Prior impeachment incidents had a formal vote of the whole House to open an inquiry because the power of impeachment rests in the House, according to the Constitution, not just by declaration of the House Speaker.

In the case of Bill Clinton’s impeachment, you not only had a formal vote for an inquiry, you also had a formal finding from Ken Starr, the independent counsel, that Clinton had committed a felony. Now you have nothing.

More troubling are reports such as Schiff seemingly trying to influence a witness in a secret meeting to testify in accordance with the Schiff’s narrative. That should disturb all Americans.

Today, Republicans showed, finally, that they’d had enough.

About thirty Republicans members of Congress stormed the closed door questioning of defense department official Laura Cooper.

They blasted the man behind it all, Rep. Adam Schiff, and the lack of transparency of the proceedings.

First, they held a press conference outside.

Then, several tried to storm the SCIF where the questioning was going on.

Some did get in and managed to delay the proceeding. Some complained that despite the fact that they are on relevant committees, they have been denied access to information.

Here’s the full video:

Good for them, they’re fighting back. Now the Senate needs to support them and say they wouldn’t go along with the sham. If they’re not going to follow the Constitution and due process, the Senate should refuse to even entertain anything that comes from the House.

The post Breaking: Dozens of Republicans Storm Schiff’s Closed Impeachment Proceeding appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group Screen-Shot-2019-10-23-at-12.07.41-PM-300x182 Breaking: Dozens of Republicans Storm Schiff’s Closed Impeachment Proceeding republicans Impeachment of President Trump impeachment Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post due process donald trump democrats Congress Allow Media Exception Abuse of Power   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com