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 86)

Joe Biden Imitates a Horned Lizard During Democrat Climate Hoax Debate

Democratic presidential candidate former Vice President Joe Biden speaks with reporters after a campaign stop at Lindy’s Diner in Keene N.H., Saturday, Aug. 24, 2019. (AP Photo/Michael Dwyer)

Yesterday, the Democrat primary field spent some 7 hours driving down CNN’s ratings and making absurd statements they will eventually have to answer for all the while earnestly debating something about as real as a Harry Potter novel.

During the time when Joe Biden was on stage, something obviously frightened him and stopped just short of going full horned lizard on us. A horned toad squirts blood from his whatever eye when in danger.

During the debate this happened:

It is safe to say that while his staff probably spent hundreds of hours rehearsing answers so he could avoid gaffes and emphasizing the importance of not sniffing the hair of random women, they never anticipated the blood-squirting eye that is going to be most significant impression Biden made during this freak-fest.

Will this become part of his campaign persona, along with making up anecdotes? If it does, it will certainly make the Democrat primary race a lot more interesting.

=========
=========
Like what you see? Then visit my story archive.

I’m on Facebook. Drop by and join the fun there.
=========
=========

The post Joe Biden Imitates a Horned Lizard During Democrat Climate Hoax Debate appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group squinty-joe-biden-300x153 Joe Biden Imitates a Horned Lizard During Democrat Climate Hoax Debate Politics Joe Biden Front Page Stories democrats cnn climate change debate CNN Allow Media Exception  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

What Will The Democratic Primaries Produce?

Westlake Legal Group democrat-debate1-620x317 What Will The Democratic Primaries Produce? Trump primary President Front Page Stories Featured Story Election Dems democrats democratic Allow Media Exception 2020

From left, Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo., Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro, Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., former Vice President Joe Biden, Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., Andrew Yang, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, D-Hawaii, Washington Gov. Jay Inslee and New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio are introduced before the second of two Democratic presidential primary debates hosted by CNN Wednesday, July 31, 2019, in the Fox Theatre in Detroit. (AP Photo/Carlos Osorio)

A two-dozen participant primary is probably not what the Democratic Party actually wanted, but it’s what they got.

An intra-party fight ahead of a big election is probably not what most people would consider “ideal” if the goal is to go into an election with a united front against whatever the incumbent party has ready for you. Many people would see it as merely a means of dividing your party at a pivotal moment, however, I would tend to disagree with that assumption in most cases.

For example, I think the intense primary of 2016 was hugely beneficial to the Republican Party (which may surprise many of you). It was vital to see where the Republican Party was, and a smarter party would have learned the lessons of the election cycle (one of those lessons would be “listen to your base” but, alas, I don’t think most Republicans in power learned that lesson at all and would rather choose to just wait out Trump). It also had the nice little bonus effect of rooting out the not-so-Republican Republicans, who now openly espouse liberal beliefs and lament what happened to their “party.”

The primary process is a good one. It forces candidates to fine-tune the messaging. It makes them work to get supporters they might other not reach, all in an effort to beat the other guys. By the end of the process, they have a working, proven platform and a coalition to ride into the general election.

A smarter Democratic Party should be aware of this, and should be openly embracing letting the bloodshed continue. But the DNC’s debate rules have been restrictive thus far, and have forced candidates off the stage. It was one of my complaints during 2016’s “kid’s table” debates, as there were plenty of Republicans who had the ideas necessary to shape policy coming into the general election, but they never had the chance.

Objectively speaking, with as many voices having access to the voters as the Democratic candidates have had, should make 2016 a tough year for Trump’s re-election. Assuming recession fears can hold off and not become realized for another 15 months (I suspect they will, but the tariffs remain a big part of that equation), then Trump could ride the success of his economy back into the White House in 2020. However, if he stubbornly hold on to the tariff policy and actually continues implementing war, the highs the economy has been riding will disappear and we will probably see the beginnings of a recession – a situation the Democrats could easily take advantage of.

That would assume, of course, that the primary process has allowed a single Democrat to build a large coalition between the fringe and the moderate Democrats alike and there is a unified plan to push the country back toward the middle with promise of erasing the tariffs, normalizing the American economy, and focusing on bringing civility and equality back to the American political process.

All of that is certainly possible, should Joe Biden remain THE guy the Democratic voters go with, and provided Biden can stop himself from making gaffes that cause his own aides to shudder with regret. However, Elizabeth Warren is on the rise, Bernie Sanders remains at the top, and the loudest voices are trying to out-progressive each other.

The end result is that the candidates will continue pushing each other further and further to the left – Obama will be lamented as not tough enough in his policies, and the candidate and their team will focus on pushing the country back to the left, not the middle.

That scenario, the one that seems most likely to play out, will actually make it easier on Trump, no matter the tariff/economic situation in America. Trump won in 2016 on the strength of the “I’m Not Hillary Clinton” trait he happens to have. Likewise, his “I’m Not Elizabeth Warren/Bernie Sanders” trait will keep him afloat against one of those two superprogressives. A race against Joe Biden will be tougher, but if Biden is pushed too far left, he’ll fall victim to the same fate.

Objectively, the Democrats are falling victim to themselves. Data does suggest Trump has weaknesses, and the Democrats can exploit those weaknesses if they attack from the moderate angle (as well as the civil/respectable angle). But, they seem more likely to take the “We have to be a Socialist Trump” route and will try to ride a manufactured populism into the general election and be crushed because of it.

The primary process should make them recognize the need for a coalition across the board. However, they’ll just see the moderate voters as those who need to be converted or run off – and it’s the latter scenario that will hand them a loss next November.

The post What Will The Democratic Primaries Produce? appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group democrat-debate1-300x153 What Will The Democratic Primaries Produce? Trump primary President Front Page Stories Featured Story Election Dems democrats democratic Allow Media Exception 2020  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Department of Labor Reinstates Leif Olson After Bloomberg’s Libelous Attack on Him Blows up in Their Faces

Westlake Legal Group department-of-labor-620x465 Department of Labor Reinstates Leif Olson After Bloomberg’s Libelous Attack on Him Blows up in Their Faces Politics Media leif olson Government Front Page Stories Featured Story douchebaggery Department of Labor democrats Bloomberg News ben penn Allow Media Exception

The Frances Perkins Building, the Department of Labor headquarters, in Washington, D.C. | (Photo: Wikimedia Commons/Ed Brown)

Yesterday, a vicious and dishonest reporter working for Bloomberg named Ben Penn ran a vicious and dishonest story smearing labor attorney Leif Olson, a recent hire by the Trump Department of Labor, as an anti-Semite based on some Facebook commentary on Paul Ryan’s electoral curb-stomping of what appeared to be an actual anti-Semite (though, in fairness, not sufficiently so as to stand out at a meeting of the House Democrat caucus), Paul Nehlen. Any sane reading of the commentary would have identified it a facetious and making Nehlen the butt of a joke. But Penn and his editors pushed out the story branding Olson as an anti-Semite. (See the coverage by Sister Toldjah. Instead of doing the right thing, a gutless Department of Labor asked for Olson’s resignation.

In short order, especially after he began to receive heat even from the left, Penn was crowing about how he’d taken out a Trump appointee who was assisting in the rewriting of wage and hour regulations.

Late this afternoon, the Department of Labor reconsidered.

The Department of Labor reinstated a political appointee Wednesday night who resigned under pressure after a Bloomberg Law reporter accused him of anti-Semitism for a Facebook post in which he was actually condemning anti-Semites in the alt-right, the Daily Caller News Foundation exclusively learned.

Acting Secretary Patrick Pizzella “personally made this decision after carefully reviewing all the facts and circumstances,” a senior Labor Department official told the DCNF. “He concluded that a correction is much better than an injustice.”

The outcome is just but it points to several related issues.

First, the response by Department of Labor was inexcusable. While it is conceivable that Olson tendered his resignation at the first hint of trouble, it is more likely that someone within the Labor Department’s management structure demanded Olson resign. If the latter is the case you have one of two things going on. Either that person is trying to sabotage the Administration’s agenda or they are a flaming gutless pus-bag. Either way, they need to be booted.

Second, it is very, very obvious that the media are acting as a journalistic hit squad and working on behalf of the Democrat Party and progressive activists to try to stymie the ability of the Administration to govern. This can only work if the Administration doesn’t treat them as what the obviously are, that is, the Biblical nest of vipers. If you thought the behavior of the media during the Russia hoax was limited to coverage of President Trump, now you know that is just how they roll.

Third, the fact that nothing ever happens to the people in the media who generate these bogus, politically motivated hits on Administration figures (how many fake scoops did CNN manufacture on the Russia hoax?) clearly shows that this is a pattern of behavior that is accepted if not actually encouraged and rewarded by major media outlets. At a minimum, Bloomberg should have apologized. They haven’t. They really should have disciplined Penn and his editor. They won’t.

This behavior is going to get worse as we get closer to November 2020 and when Trump gets reelected it is going hit stratospheric levels.

=========
=========
Like what you see? Then visit my story archive.

I’m on Facebook. Drop by and join the fun there.
=========
=========

The post Department of Labor Reinstates Leif Olson After Bloomberg’s Libelous Attack on Him Blows up in Their Faces appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group department-of-labor-300x225 Department of Labor Reinstates Leif Olson After Bloomberg’s Libelous Attack on Him Blows up in Their Faces Politics Media leif olson Government Front Page Stories Featured Story douchebaggery Department of Labor democrats Bloomberg News ben penn Allow Media Exception  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

The Bulwark Conserves Conservatism By Criticizing Dan Crenshaw and White Knighting for AOC

Westlake Legal Group AOCAPphoto-620x317 The Bulwark Conserves Conservatism By Criticizing Dan Crenshaw and White Knighting for AOC The Bulwark rights republicans Politics Loaning Guns jim swift Guns Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story false equivalency democrats Dan Crenshaw Bill Kristol Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez 2nd Amendment

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., makes an objection to a Republican argument as the House Oversight and Reform Committee considers whether to hold Attorney General William Barr and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross in contempt for failing to turn over subpoenaed documents related to the Trump administration’s decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, June 12, 2019. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

So much conserving of conservatism. Where would we be without these people?

Bill Kristol’s outfit over at the The Bulwark is doing what it always does. Going after real Republicans while claiming to hold the mantle as the only true conservatives left.

Today’s target was Rep. Dan Crenshaw, a rising star within the GOP, war veteran, and committed conservative voice. If you missed it, he and AOC got into a rather stupid exchange (on her part) in which she suggested that he shouldn’t let his friends borrow firearms because they “have likely” abused their spouses.

It went on like that for a few more tweets with AOC doing her typical mean girls snark while not actually making a salient point.

While the media will no doubt take her side, you’d expect “conservative” media to recognize the vapidness of AOC’s argument and push back on it. Instead, The Bulwark ran with this hot take.

There are a number of problems with this scenario Crenshaw lays out. The first is giving a loaded weapon to somebody who may not be trained to or capable of wielding it. The second is knowing what the laws are. Giving a firearm to a stranger or acquaintance is a bad idea, no matter how noble the intent. Firearm makers and dealers enjoy some protection from civil liability because it makes sense; individuals don’t have federal protection, civil or criminal. And then there are the many issues involved with crossing state lines and different laws in different jurisdictions.

If I may generalize about Texas for a second, about 35 percent of people there are estimated to own firearms. Non-gun-owning Texans are probably more likely to have experience with guns than, say, a writer from Brooklyn. That does not make lending them a handgun for travel a good idea. Even if it is legal. (And, especially if you’re a member of Congress.)

If you know anything about The Bulwark, you can probably guess this is an article by Jim Swift.

Does he think Crenshaw is just going to hand his gun to random people? When I was a teenager, I used to borrow an uncle’s rifle to hunt with. He knew I was properly trained, having taken a hunter’s safety course and fulfilled the state’s requirements. There were never any issues and because I didn’t have a deer lease of my own, I only went a few times a year. It was simply easier to borrow the gun.

In self-defense situations, perhaps it is less common to loan a firearm. But that makes it no less worthy of a right to maintain. If I choose to give my gun to a family member while I’m at work, that’s my choice. As long as they are legal and capable, it’s really none of Jim Swift’s business. Crenshaw also does bring up the hunting example as well, which is probably the more frequent occurrence.

To be fair, the article does point out that AOC’s response is in bad faith, but the overarching issue here is greater than just this Twitter exchange.

Conservatives need allies they can trust on gun control. They don’t need a conservative “intellectual” class that is so in love with their own voice that they will talk their way out of their 2nd Amendment rights just to appear above the fray to the beltway. Whether Crenshaw’s example of self-defense is widespread or not is beside the point and not something that should earn him a snarky rebuttal. Does the right Crenshaw asserts exist or not? Swift doesn’t answer that question because of course he doesn’t. Better to snipe from the sidelines.

Swift ends with this typical line.

But these are all hypotheticals. And neither Crenshaw nor AOC are really adding much to the debate. Such is 2019.

This “let me make a false equivalency and criticize both sides to appear smart and fair” act is growing old from some of the supposed right. Take a stand already. Do you support the 2nd Amendment or not? Whether you do or don’t, at least lay out your position so we can judge how conservative it actually is. That’s asking a lot though. Conservatism has simply been a means to gain power for a lot of these people. It just so happens that a lot of them now write for The Bulwark.

————————————————

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 Bulwark Conserves Conservatism By Criticizing Dan Crenshaw and White Knighting for AOC appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group RepDanCrenshaw-300x153 The Bulwark Conserves Conservatism By Criticizing Dan Crenshaw and White Knighting for AOC The Bulwark rights republicans Politics Loaning Guns jim swift Guns Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story false equivalency democrats Dan Crenshaw Bill Kristol Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez 2nd Amendment  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

The NRA Pulls No Punches in its Strike Against Walmart’s New Anti-Gun Policy

Westlake Legal Group gun-1218708_1280-620x386 The NRA Pulls No Punches in its Strike Against Walmart’s New Anti-Gun Policy Walmart Uncategorized open carry nra NASCAR handguns Guns gun control Front Page Stories Featured Story Doug McMillon democrats Culture crime Business ammunition Allow Media Exception

 

 

On Tuesday, Walmart made major announcements propelled by recent mass shootings — one of which occurred at the chain’s El Paso location (here, here, and here).

Following that tragedy — which took 22 lives — the retail giant will no longer sell handgun or short-barrel rifle ammo. In Alaska, it’ll discontinue its last remnant of handgun sales.

What’s more: America’s most ubiquitous discounter is asking its customers to no longer use their open-carry privilege in-store (here).

Why? Because the employment of such rights has “frightened or concerned [their] associates and customers.”

Well, the NRA has a few words about the ‘Mart’s moves.

From a press release:

“It is shameful to see Walmart succumb to the pressure of the anti-gun elites. Lines at Walmart will soon be replaced by lines at other retailers who are more supportive of America’s fundamental freedoms.”

As per Tuesday’s announcements, Walmart CEO Doug McMillon believes he’s fighting for a better world:

“It’s clear to us that the status quo is unacceptable. We hope that everyone will understand the circumstances that led to this new policy and will respect the concerns of their fellow shoppers and our associates.”

Are most Walmart shoppers — in states where open carry is legal — really scared by the presence of legally-owned firearms — particularly given the fact that 22 unarmed individuals were just slaughtered at a similar store by a bad guy with a gun?

Or is Doug tone deaf?

The NRA thinks Walmart’s ignoring the most direct cause of crime — the criminal:

“Rather than place the blame on the criminal, Walmart has chosen to victimize law-abiding Americans. Our leaders must be willing to approach the problems of crime, violence and mental health with sincerity and honesty.”

Not only did Walmart make its own changes known; it also trumpeted change from Capitol Hill — it wants Congress to legislate gun control:

“We encourage our nation’s leaders to move forward and strengthen background checks and to remove weapons from those who have been determined to pose an imminent danger.”

Doug did, however, also reference social or other types of causes:

“We must also do more, as a country, to understand the root causes that lead to this type of violent behavior. Today, I’m sending letters to the White House and the Congressional leadership that call for action on these common sense measures.”

As for Walmart’s direction, I suppose it shouldn’t be surprising; when NASCAR takes a liberal turn, all bets are off:

View this post on Instagram

NASCAR decided to turn their back on their customer base, joining the likes of Yeti, Dick’s and Under Armour. We were approached by a NASCAR publication eager to earn our business, but after submitting our ad it was immediately rejected, stating that we cannot depict “assault weapons”… whatever those are. We resubmitted the ad after adding a large ‘CENSORED’ bar over the rifle, with a tag reading “This publication rejected our ad”. This too was rejected by NASCAR. They said they did not like that we called them out. We resubmitted a third time, with a tag line reading “Visit www.Dark-Storm.com to find out why!”. This was again rejected. They did not like the words “FIND OUT WHY”. As we have learned, NASCAR has made a “gradual shift” but this doesn’t seem very gradual to us. It seems as though NASCAR has turned their back on the overwhelming majority of their fan base in the most embarrassing way possible. #nascar

A post shared by Dark Storm Industries (@darkstormindustries) on Aug 23, 2019 at 7:05pm PDT

Here’s the NRA’s full statement:

-ALEX

 

Relevant RedState links in this article: here, herehere, and here.

See 3 more pieces from me:

Unfathomable: Alyssa Milano Tweets For Gun Control, Pulls The Trigger Against Basic Common Sense

Pat Sajak Reminds Us Of The Omniscience Of Celebrity But Drops A Bomb, & This Roundup Of His Tweets’ll Do You Right

Stop What You’re Doing, Put Your Worries Aside, & Let This Child Sing – She Has A Message We Need To Hear

Find all my RedState work here.

And please follow Alex Parker on Twitter and Facebook.

Thank you for reading! Please sound off in the Comments section below. 

If you have an iPhone and want to comment, select the box with the upward arrow at the bottom of your screen; swipe left and choose “Request Desktop Site.” If it fails to automatically refresh, manually reload the page. Scroll down to the red horizontal bar that says “Show Comments.”

The post The NRA Pulls No Punches in its Strike Against Walmart’s New Anti-Gun Policy appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group gun-1218708_1280-300x187 The NRA Pulls No Punches in its Strike Against Walmart’s New Anti-Gun Policy Walmart Uncategorized open carry nra NASCAR handguns Guns gun control Front Page Stories Featured Story Doug McMillon democrats Culture crime Business ammunition Allow Media Exception  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Christine Blasey Ford’s Attorney Admits She Wanted ‘An Asterisk’ Next To Kavanaugh’s Name Before He ‘Takes A Scalpel To’ Roe v. Wade

 

Westlake Legal Group christine-ford-620x433 Christine Blasey Ford’s Attorney Admits She Wanted ‘An Asterisk’ Next To Kavanaugh’s Name Before He ‘Takes A Scalpel To’ Roe v. Wade SCOTUS Ryan Lovelace Justice Brett Kavanaugh Front Page Stories Featured Story democrats Debra Katz Culture corruption Congress christine blasey ford Allow Media Exception #metoo

Christine Blasey Ford testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Sept. 27, 2018. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik, Pool)

 

The Daily Caller obtained a video of Christine Blasey-Ford’s attorney, Debra Katz, speaking to a group of the University of Baltimore’s Feminist Legal Theory Conference in April. Katz admits that part of Blasey-Ford’s motivation for accusing now-Justice Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault in July 2018 was political.

Katz said, “In the aftermath of these hearings, I believe that Christine’s testimony brought about more good than the harm misogynist Republicans caused by allowing Kavanaugh on the court. He will always have an asterisk next to his name. When he takes a scalpel to Roe v. Wade, we will know who he is, we know his character, and we know what motivates him, and that is important; it is important that we know, and that is part of what motivated Christine.”

According to the Daily Caller, the video was first reported by Ryan Lovelace, a writer for the National Law Journal, for his new book, “Search and Destroy: Inside the Campaign Against Brett Kavanaugh.”

Lovelace told the Daily Caller, “A lot of people ask if Christine Blasey-Ford was lying. To know that, you have to know her motivation. Since she has not talked to me directly, the best way I can understand what she is thinking is by what her lawyer is saying. And her lawyer says that she is motivated, at least in part, by Roe v. Wade protecting legalized abortion. It contradicts what both Ford and her lawyers told the press.”

During her testimony before the Senate, “Ford had maintained that she came forward out of a sense of civic duty to provide information that she thought senators needed to know before voting on Kavanaugh,” said Lovelace. “This calls into question everything that Ford and Katz have previously said. I think if we knew in September what we know now, there would have been all kinds of questions at the hearing about this.”

Lovelace also told the Daily Caller he “believes there will be more scrutiny going forward, saying that this is part of the reason he penned “Search and Destroy.” He added that, “I want people to look for themselves and to understand for themselves.”

Ford’s political motivations were apparent to most Republicans and any Democrat who was willing to admit it. Not a single aspect of her bizarre story of a sexual assault she claimed happened 37 years prior could be corroborated. She wasn’t even quite sure of the year it happened.

Since that time, college acquaintances have come forward with stories which describe Blasey-Ford as the opposite of the wounded, fragile child-woman she portrayed during her testimony.

I disagree with Lovelace that there will be more scrutiny going forward. There should have been an immediate investigation of Blasey-Ford’s claims. There were so many pieces of her story which didn’t add up.

No one should be surprised to hear of Debra Katz’ remarks. The situation was pretty clear at the time. Actually, I believe her motivation was purely political, but if Katz had admitted that, she would have put both Blasey-Ford and herself in legal jeopardy. Blasey-Ford and her handlers engaged in character assassination on a scale we’ve never seen before…At least until John Durham’s findings are released, that is.

The post Christine Blasey Ford’s Attorney Admits She Wanted ‘An Asterisk’ Next To Kavanaugh’s Name Before He ‘Takes A Scalpel To’ Roe v. Wade appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group christine-ford-300x209 Christine Blasey Ford’s Attorney Admits She Wanted ‘An Asterisk’ Next To Kavanaugh’s Name Before He ‘Takes A Scalpel To’ Roe v. Wade SCOTUS Ryan Lovelace Justice Brett Kavanaugh Front Page Stories Featured Story democrats Debra Katz Culture corruption Congress christine blasey ford Allow Media Exception #metoo  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Newest Democratic fundraiser: Andrew McCabe

Westlake Legal Group a-1 Newest Democratic fundraiser: Andrew McCabe The Blog Russia Pennsylvania Lancaster Hillary Clinton fundraiser Federal Bureau of Investigation democrats comey Andrew McCabe Allahpundit

Via the Free Beacon. Given all the ResistanceBucksWestlake Legal Group 2122 Newest Democratic fundraiser: Andrew McCabe The Blog Russia Pennsylvania Lancaster Hillary Clinton fundraiser Federal Bureau of Investigation democrats comey Andrew McCabe Allahpundit  the left showered on him after he was fired, it’s only proper that he return the favor.

Did I miss a news story somewhere or isn’t this guy still under threat of indictment? The interest in him lately from across the aisle would have you believe that he’s a political rising star, not a man staring at the possibility of prison. He just landed a CNN contributor’s gig, he has a book out, now he’s giving speeches for the opposition party in 2020 swing states. When did Andrew McCabe become Stacey Abrams? Are Democrats lining him up for a House run or something?

In the age of FaceTime and Skype, he could conduct a front-porch campaign from behind the glass at the federal pen, I suppose.

McCabe is now also participating in Democratic fundraising events. According to the Pennsylvania Democratic Party’s website, McCabe is scheduled to be the keynote speaker at a fundraising banquet for the Lancaster County Democratic Committee.

Tickets for the event, which can be purchased through ActBlue, range from $80 to $160. The more expensive “Speaker’s Circle” tickets come with access to a private reception with McCabe and photograph with him. He is scheduled to speak for 45 minutes and take questions for 15 minutes, according to the site…

McCabe told event organizers that he plans to discuss his “one-on-one interactions with Donald Trump” during the event. He also will cover the “fallout and aftermath” of former FBI director James Comey’s firing, “Russian meddling in the 2016 election,” and special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.

The idea of hating Trump so much that you’d pop for 160 bucks for a personal photo with Andrew McCabe fills me with a degree of dread normally only experienced when contemplating death. It’s one notch up from paying for an audience with the Krassenstein brothers.

For cripes sake, you can buy a house in parts of the midwest for $160. In Detroit, certainly.

My first thought upon hearing that McCabe was now in demand on the Democratic political circuit was naturally, “What about Comey?” If McCabe’s appeal to the left derives from Trump’s antipathy to him, surely a man whom Trump loathes even more like Big Jim would be that much more appealing. Plus, Comey was nearly charged by the DOJ for his anti-Trump activities in leaking memos. What better proof of commitment to the Resistance could there be than that? He’s even been donating money to the party! But then I remembered: Oh, right, his last-minute letter about reopening the Emailgate probe may have tanked Hillary’s chances of winning the election, thus enabling the very presidency that Democrats so despise. Comey will never overcome that to regain respectability among them, no matter how many nasty tweets Trump posts about him. He’ll have to watch the Democratic romance with disgraced Trump-hating former FBI officials play out from the outside, with his face pressed against the window.

The post Newest Democratic fundraiser: Andrew McCabe appeared first on Hot Air.

Westlake Legal Group a-1-300x153 Newest Democratic fundraiser: Andrew McCabe The Blog Russia Pennsylvania Lancaster Hillary Clinton fundraiser Federal Bureau of Investigation democrats comey Andrew McCabe Allahpundit  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Obama Counsel Greg Craig Found Not Guilty of Lying to the DOJ

Westlake Legal Group justice-2071539_1280-620x465 Obama Counsel Greg Craig Found Not Guilty of Lying to the DOJ Politics Obama Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story democrats

Put this down for the least shocking thing of the day.

Former Barack Obama general counsel Greg Craig has been found not guilty by a Washington D.C. jury after he was accused of misleading the DOJ about his foreign lobbying activities. Craig was the only Democrat pursued by Robert Mueller, who would eventually hand the case off leading to prosecution.

This via Law.com.

The verdict from a jury of nine men and three women came after nearly five hours of deliberations and capped off a three-week trial that gripped the legal community and K Street lobbying groups. The trial served as an early test of the Justice Department’s stepped up enforcement of the Foreign Agents Registration Act, a decades-old law requiring the disclosure of lobbying, public relations work and other influence efforts for overseas powers. Craig was not charged with failing to register under that law, commonly known as FARA.

Well, K Street can breathe easy. It seems things are back to the status quo now that Trump associates aren’t in the cross hairs. Why didn’t Mueller and the DOJ squeeze him to garner a guilty verdict as he did others, instead going incredibly easy on, not even charging him under FARA? I’ll let you speculate on that yourself.

What Craig did was fairly clear. We know he was working for the Ukrainian government and we know he didn’t register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. It’s the exact same thing Paul Manafort was nailed for (although he had other charges on top of the FARA violations). Instead of just admitting it, Craig covered up his role in preparing the report for the Ukrainians, thereby avoiding disclosure of the $4 million paid to his law firm.

The trial reexamined a legal project Craig led for the Russia-aligned government of Ukraine in 2012, when he was a prominent partner at the law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom. Craig was retained by the Ukrainian government to conduct a purportedly independent review of  the widely criticized prosecution of former Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, a political rival of the country’s president at the time, Viktor Yanukovych.

In January, months after Craig retired under a cloud of legal scrutiny, Skadden agreed to pay $4.6 million as part of a settlement with the Justice Department resolving claims that the firm failed to register under FARA.

Craig, 74, was accused of concealing the extent of his role in the public release of the Tymoshenko report when the Justice Department inquired about whether he needed to register as a foreign agent. Prosecutors argued that, by avoiding FARA’s disclosure requirements, Craig was able to conceal the fact that the Ukrainian oligarch Viktor Pinchuk had paid Skadden more than $4 million to prepare the Tymoshenko report.

As I said though, none of this is surprising. This is why all the talk of charging Comey or McCabe does nothing to excite me. You will never secure a conviction in Washington D.C. or New York in cases that involve such highly political figures with sympathies on the left. These people are unofficially above the law and they know it. You can expect the same, corrupt lobbying activities to continue. Well, unless you are connected to Donald Trump, then you better watch your back at all times.

————————————————

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 Obama Counsel Greg Craig Found Not Guilty of Lying to the DOJ appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group Untitled-300x153 Obama Counsel Greg Craig Found Not Guilty of Lying to the DOJ Politics Obama Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story democrats  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

10 Counties That Could Decide The Next US President

Westlake Legal Group American-Flag-620x324 10 Counties That Could Decide The Next US President republicans Reid Wilson President Trump President Obama Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Featured Story elections donald trump democrats Allow Media Exception 2020

Three states were key to Trump’s 2016 victory. He won the presidency by winning Pennsylvania by 68,236 votes, Michigan by 11,837 and Wisconsin by 27,257. The race was decided by 107,000 votes which represented 0.09% of all votes cast. Obama had comfortably won all three states in 2012.

The Hill’s Reid Wilson conducted a study hoping to identify which counties might determine the winner of the 2020 election. Wilson interviewed 24 political scientists, strategists, and observers and has compiled a list of ten counties he believes will choose the next US president.

The election is still fourteen months away. I realize we live in a world where politics are constantly shifting and a misstep can change a candidates’ fortune in a New York minute which makes this, in reality, an impossible endeavor. Still, it’s interesting to look at analysis from all sources to gain insight into the current political landscape. So, may I present to you the results of Wilson’s analysis – the ten US counties he considers will be the most influential in 2020.

1. Erie County, PA

Trump won this county in 2016, which was the first time a Republican has won since Ronald Reagan in 1984. Wilson points out that 50% of voters are “registered Democrats, and just 36 percent are Republican. Democrats hold five of seven county council seats. But those Democrats are not coastal progressives, Pennsylvania politicos say.”

Terry Madonna, director of the Center for Politics and Public Affairs at Franklin and Marshall College, told Wilson, “What you have is a working-class county that’s socially conservative. Many Democrats there believe that their party has deserted them and become the party of big cities.”

Analysis: In 2016, Trump beat Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton there by 1.6 percentage points — about twice the margin by which he won Pennsylvania’s electoral votes. In 2008 and 2012, Obama won Erie County by double-digit margins. Democratic success there will be a sign that the party has bridged the divide with its own voters who feel left behind.

2. Sauk County, WI

Brian Reisinger, a Republican strategist who was raised in Sauk County, said, “Back in the day, Wisconsin farm country used to more consistently go for Democrats. The rural shift toward Republicans is partially offset by the number of Madison-types who are crossing over the county line to live in small towns where taxes are lower and the world makes more sense.”

Analysis: Sauk County has predicted the winner of Wisconsin’s electoral votes in nine of the past 10 presidential elections. Trump was the first Republican to carry the county in 28 years, when he won it by just 109 votes out of about 30,000 cast. He carried Wisconsin’s electoral votes by about eight-tenths of a percentage point.

3. Muskegon County, MI

Wilson spoke to RNC official Holly Hughes. “Muskegon will be indicative of the statewide vote in the next election.”

Analysis: Today, its economy is dominated by a struggling manufacturing industry and a growing health care sector. Though the county has voted Democratic in every presidential election since 1992, Clinton won it by just 1,200 votes — the closest margin of any county in Michigan, which gave its electoral votes to Trump.

If Trump continues making inroads there, he would keep Michigan’s electoral votes in his column.

4. Maricopa County, AZ

This county is slowly moving leftward. Mike Noble, a Republican pollster in Phoenix, pointed out that Trump won this county by 3%, which is a slightly lower margin than his statewide win. He said, “The areas most at risk for Republicans are middle-class precincts where college-educated residents tend to make between $50,000 and $100,000 a year. It’s in these suburban areas where we are seeing the biggest shift in party voter preference. Those [who] are college educated or above is where the GOP is currently hurting.”

Analysis: Only one Republican in recent history has won a statewide election without winning Maricopa County.

Phoenix’s rapid growth is being fueled by young workers in search of a good job — who tend to bring their blue-state voting habits with them. In 2018, Kyrsten Sinema beat Republican Martha McSally in Maricopa County and became the first Democrat to win a Senate seat in Arizona since 1988.

5. Tarrant County, TX

Republicans have been losing support in Texas for a while now.

Democratic strategist Ed Espinoza said, “In Tarrant, you still have some of those Country Club Republicans. There is a greater discomfort among Republicans with the rhetoric coming from the president and the party in Texas than there might be in Dallas or other places.”

Analysis: Republican margins of victory are declining even in historically red regions. Republicans there peaked in 2004, when Bush scored 62 percent of the vote, or 349,000 votes. Twelve years later, Trump won just 52 percent of the vote, or 346,000 votes. Two years after that, then-Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D) won Tarrant County by 4,000 votes over Sen. Ted Cruz (R).

Tarrant County hasn’t voted for a Democrat since Lyndon Johnson won his home state in 1964. But its booming population may change that: Since Republicans began losing market share there, about 40 percent of the county’s residents are new.

6. New Hanover County, NC

John Wynne, a North Carolina elections analyst, told Wilson that, “Like most of the state’s larger cities, Wilmington has seen an influx of urban white liberals, making the city more Democratic. At the same time, affluent retirees, who tend to vote Republican, are settling along the beaches.”

Analysis: Dominated by Wilmington, New Hanover was part of the Democratic Solid South until Richard Nixon’s election in 1968. Since then, it has only voted for one Democratic presidential candidate — fellow Southerner Jimmy Carter.

But the GOP’s historic advantage there is shrinking. Obama came within 1,400 votes of winning New Hanover County in 2008, and Trump became the first Republican to win less than half the vote since George H.W. Bush split the conservative vote with Ross Perot in 1992.

Trump won the county by 2.9 percentage points. He won North Carolina by 3.6 points.

7. Peach County, GA

DuBose Porter, a former chairman of the state Democratic Party, explained that, “It’s struggling, like most rural communities are in Georgia. We’re losing health care providers. We’re losing hospitals. We’re losing manufacturing, and we’re not replacing that with anything.”

Analysis: About a hundred miles south of Atlanta lies one of the country’s clearest examples of a combined racial and geographic divide. In the middle of rural Georgia, Peach County’s residents are about half white and 45 percent African American. About half live in its cities, and half live in rural areas.

Those divides might as well be partisan stand-ins. Peach County is one of a few hundred pivot counties in America, counties that voted for Obama twice and Trump in 2016. In 1968, the segregationist George Wallace took 42 percent of the vote there.

In a county of just 27,000 people, every vote counts. Last time around, Peach County stood as a bellwether for the entire state. Trump took 50.3 percent of the vote, almost perfectly matched his performance statewide, 50.4 percent. In 2018, Republican Brian Kemp scored 52 percent of the vote in his bid for governor, beating out Democrat Stacey Abrams by just under 500 votes.

8. Washington County, MN

Former Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) said, “President Trump has already transformed rural politics in his favor, so increasing support from suburban voters will be key to the outcome of the election.”

Analysis: Minnesota represents one of a small number of states that voted for Clinton in 2016 that presents Trump with a chance to expand his map in 2020. If he wants to win here, he must carry Washington County, along the border with Wisconsin.

The first white settlers arrived along the banks of the St. Croix River to log its rich forests. In 1838, early residents in Stillwater, the county seat, formally petitioned Congress to create a new state called Minnesota. Today, its residents are more likely to commute to the booming Twin Cities. A fifth of its residents have moved in since 2000, blending its rural roots with exurban sprawl.

Washington County voted twice for George W. Bush, then twice for Obama. Clinton carried Washington County by just 1.8 percentage points, almost exactly the margin by which she carried Minnesota as a whole.

9. Hillsborough County, NH

Hillary Clinton won New Hampshire by 3,000 votes. In Hillsborough County, however, Trump won by 500 votes. Approximately 25% of the state’s voters live in this county. GOP strategist Mike Dennehy said, “Hillsborough tends to represent the state in terms of electoral outcomes.”

Analysis: Hillsborough was a historically Republican county, dating back to the 19th century. But party affiliations have changed as more Bostonians move north and commute back to the city; Obama won Hillsborough twice.

And while Trump won narrowly in 2016, there are signs of serious discontent. The 2018 midterm elections wiped out many Hillsborough members of the state legislature; today, Democrats hold two-thirds of the state House districts in the county.

10. Lincoln County, ME

“Lincoln County reflects many of today’s most fraught political dividing lines all in one, and all well-balanced. For two centuries it has been a working-class hub, home of shipbuilding industries and the lobster fisheries that give Maine its distinctive contribution to American cuisine,” said Maine-based journalist Colin Woodard.

He added that, “At the same time, its picturesque islands and landscapes have made it a longtime tourism destination, from the Gilded Age to today. A mix of working class fishermen, deep-pocketed retirees (both liberal and conservative) and tourism-dependent workers and business owners, partisan political contests are highly contested at almost every level, from town councils and the state legislature to Congress and the presidency.”

Analysis: Those rival factions fought to a near draw in 2016. Clinton won Lincoln County, 47.6 percent to 45.2 percent — nearly identical to her 2-point win in the popular vote. If Trump keeps his blue-collar base, or if ancestral Republicans break against him and cost him the White House, Lincoln County will be the microcosm through which to view the 2020 outcome.

 

Though there seems to be movement to the left in many of these counties, it will be interesting to see if traditional Democrats are willing to support any of the far left candidates (outside of Biden) who are currently competing for the nomination. All of the counties on this list are comprised of working-class, middle-class Americans who might not quite be ready for open borders, free health care for illegals, late-term abortions or the rest of the new policies favored by the left. It’s disheartening to think that conservative or moderate Democrats might be ready to take the leap into socialism.

If any one of the Democratic candidates currently running should win the presidency, the United States, as we’ve known it, will be gone. And I hope that voters understand that.

 

The post 10 Counties That Could Decide The Next US President appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group American-Flag-300x157 10 Counties That Could Decide The Next US President republicans Reid Wilson President Trump President Obama Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Featured Story elections donald trump democrats Allow Media Exception 2020  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Reporter Behind Libelous Bloomberg Hit Job on Leif Olson Justifies His Lies in True #Resistance Fashion

If you ever needed any more proof that our media are simply the paid henchmen of the progressive movement and the Democrat party, you need look no further than the sorry and shabby spectacle carried out on the pages ob Bloomberg News yesterday.

A vicious, lackwit “senior reporter” named Ben Penn (presented as a “know your enemy” courtesy) posted a story, a story approved by Bloomberg mamagement, that accused Trump Labor Department appointee Leif Olson of anti-Semitic comments Trump Labor Aide Quits After Anti-Semitic Facebook Posts Surface. The anti-Semitic comments were actually clearly sarcastic commentary on Paul Ryan’s demolition of Pauh Nehlen in 2016.

Read the story by SisterToldjah for background.

By way of indictment, Penn trots out some of the pro-bono litigation that Olson has been engaged it. A notable non-conservatve and spastic-kneejerking anti-Trumper Ken White notes that Olson’s pro bono work didn’t really have a political tone:

As media, left and right piled on to the feckless goof trotted out this by way of defending a action that is simply grotesque in its maliciousness:

Yep. Never mind that I lied. Never mind that I libeled a good man. Never mind that this calumny that I conjured out of thin air will forever be associated with this guy any time he is googled. He was a Trump appointee. Why are y’all so upset. Viva le Resistance.

And, I think there we come to the true motive. Penn was pointed to the Facebook posts by someone in the labor movement who wanted Olson taken out. Penn cheerfully engaged in this deeply dishonest smear job and, thanks to an absolutely gutless response the Department of Labor, succeeded. Now he can’t understand why he isn’t being carried about the stadium on the shoulders of admiring throngs.

=========
=========
Like what you see? Then visit my story archive.

I’m on Facebook. Drop by and join the fun there.
=========
=========

The post Reporter Behind Libelous Bloomberg Hit Job on Leif Olson Justifies His Lies in True #Resistance Fashion appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group resistance-trump-300x241 Reporter Behind Libelous Bloomberg Hit Job on Leif Olson Justifies His Lies in True #Resistance Fashion republicans Politics Media leif olson Front Page Stories Featured Story douchebaggery donald trump Department of Labor democrats Bloomberg News ben penn Allow Media Exception  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com