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 "Featured Story" (Page 193)

Trump Campaign Out With Scorching New Video Starring ‘The Squad’

Westlake Legal Group tlaib-omar-aoc-pressley-620x317 Trump Campaign Out With Scorching New Video Starring ‘The Squad’ rashida tlaib progressives President Trump Ilhan Omar Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats Campaigns Ayanna Pressley AOC Allow Media Exception 2020

In this combination image from left; Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., July 10, 2019, Washington, Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., March 12, 2019, in Washington, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-NY., July 12, 2019, in Washington, and Rep. Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., July 10, 2019, in Washington. In tweets Sunday, President Donald Trump portrays the lawmakers as foreign-born troublemakers who should go back to their home countries. In fact, the lawmakers, except one, were born in the U.S. (AP Photo)

President Trump has succeeded in making the four far-left freshmen Congresswomen the face of the Democratic Party. And he’s determined to keep it that way.

His campaign has released a new video starring Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY), Ilhan Omar (MN), Rashida Tlaib (MI) and Ayanna Pressley (MA) at their radical best.

The video first features a newscaster reporting a “letter written by Representative-elect Omar asking a U.S. District Court judge for compassion when sentencing nine Minnesota Somali-American men convicted of joining the terror group ISIS.”

It shows a smiling Omar telling a crowd that “ignorance is very pervasive in this country.”

Next, it moves onto footage of Tlaib telling supporters that “we’re going to go in there and we’re going to impeach the mother***er.” It switches over to the video which surfaced earlier this week of Tlaib being dragged out of a 2016 Trump campaign event.

Then it’s Pressley’s turn. She is shown making her comments heard ’round the world at a recent NetRoots Nation event. “We don’t need any brown faces that don’t want to be a brown voice. We don’t need black faces that don’t want to be a black voice. We don’t need Muslims that don’t want to be a Muslim voice. We don’t need queers that don’t want to be a queer voice.” That was all for Pressley.

And they save the most radical for last. AOC is shown saying that “the women and children on that border that are trying to seek refuge and seek opportunity in the United States of America with nothing but the shirt on their backs are acting more American than any person who seeks to keep them out ever will be.”

Finally, AOC is shown telling an interviewer, “Yeah, you know if that’s what radical means, call me a radical.”

The words are repeated, but a voice changing machine is used which lowers the tone and slows the words. And, for good measure, they give her kaleidoscope eyes.

Watch the video below.

The post Trump Campaign Out With Scorching New Video Starring ‘The Squad’ appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group tlaib-omar-aoc-pressley-300x153 Trump Campaign Out With Scorching New Video Starring ‘The Squad’ rashida tlaib progressives President Trump Ilhan Omar Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats Campaigns Ayanna Pressley AOC Allow Media Exception 2020  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Call the Wahmbulance: AOC Gets Schooled On Her Own Words After Whining About What Kevin McCarthy Calls Her

Westlake Legal Group media.townhall-2-4-620x317 Call the Wahmbulance: AOC Gets Schooled On Her Own Words After Whining About What Kevin McCarthy Calls Her washington D.C. Social Media republicans Politics North Carolina New York Kevin McCarthy Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post democrats Culture Congress AOC Allow Media Exception Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

The week just wouldn’t feel complete without some unintentional comic relief courtesy of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY).

Remember a few months ago when AOC seemingly took offense over some Fox News personalities allegedly referring to her as “Cortez” rather than “Ocasio-Cortez”?

Not a single instance of this happening was ever provided as proof of this serious injustice, but nevertheless she jumped on to the Twitter machine to, of course, protest:

She went on to say that simply referring to her as “AOC” was “fine though”:

Fast forward to Thursday. Apparently Ocasio-Cortez is on the verge of needing a wahmbulance called on her behalf thanks to how House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy reporteredly refers to her:

HORRORS. She wasn’t pleased:

But, but … she said just a few months ago that calling her “AOC” was ok?! I’m so confused:

Red State‘s Bonchie had a response for her that, once you read it, felt like that feeling you get when your favorite major league baseball team scores the winning run in the bottom of the 15th inning in game 7 of the World Series:

Bonchtastic!

The comments to AOC’s post were not all negative against her, though. Pro-abortion mouthpiece Alyssa Milano jumped in to express some sisterly solidarity with the freshman Congresswoman:

Trust me, ladies. Y’all being called “AOC” and ““ah-leese-ah” respectively is much more polite than what y’all call us.

—————-
— Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 15+ 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 Call the Wahmbulance: AOC Gets Schooled On Her Own Words After Whining About What Kevin McCarthy Calls Her appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group media.townhall-2-4-300x153 Call the Wahmbulance: AOC Gets Schooled On Her Own Words After Whining About What Kevin McCarthy Calls Her washington D.C. Social Media republicans Politics North Carolina New York Kevin McCarthy Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post democrats Culture Congress AOC Allow Media Exception Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Twitter is Trump’s Laser Pointer & the Democrats/Media are the Cats

Westlake Legal Group 79D48C24-BFF2-48A8-86C9-C562195C40CF-620x687 Twitter is Trump’s Laser Pointer & the Democrats/Media are the Cats Uncategorized Trump republicans Politics pelosi Media Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story elections donald trump democrats Allow Media Exception

Credit: B. Black Fox

Twitter is Trump’s Laser Pointer & the Democrats/Media are the Cats

Trump has the Democrats/Media cabal (DMC) on the run…literally. He controls the news cycle. Every Sunday Morning, he decides what the DMC is going to be outraged about for the upcoming week. Then he tweets out that outrageous spark and that starts the news cycle for the week.

Last week was no different. He started off with a tweet about two female Democrat House rookies, known for their anti-American stances. Within three days, he had the leftists so bamboozled, their leader, the Speaker of the House, who had been trying to distance herself from them ended up publicly embracing the America hating foursome. As I mentioned in a previous article, this is going to cost the Democrats in 2020. The titular head of the Democrat party has just aligned with four anti-American legislators who hate those same blue collar workers and the Americana they are part of. In 2020, those blue collar Obama voters who took a chance on Trump in 2016, are gonna be back at the polls…with friends this time, just because of stuff like this.

Trump does this all the time. I can just imagine him upstairs in The Residence telling Miss Melania, “Hold my Big Mac and watch this.” He uses his rapid fire tweets to stay ahead of his detractors. His fast pace keeps him continually inside the DMC decision cycle. He’s using his twitter account like a laser pointer and the DMC, the cats, are going nuts trying to keep up with the red dot. On more than one occasion, his red dot runs the cats right into the wall. Come to think of it, the cat in the illustration does kind of remind me of Speaker Pelosi.

Special thanks to B. Black Fox who kicked out this illustration in what seemed about 30 seconds.

Mike Ford, a retired Infantry Officer, writes on Military, Foreign Affairs and occasionally dabbles in Political and Economic matters.

Follow him on Twitter: @MikeFor10394583

You can find his other Red State work here.

The post Twitter is Trump’s Laser Pointer & the Democrats/Media are the Cats appeared first on RedState.

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

Sources Tell Fox News: DOJ Probe Is Focusing on Overseas Meetings Between FBI Informant and George Papadopoulos

Westlake Legal Group papadopoulos-620x341 Sources Tell Fox News: DOJ Probe Is Focusing on Overseas Meetings Between FBI Informant and George Papadopoulos Trey Gowdy Special Counsel Robert Mueller Mueller Investigation joseph mifsud george papadopoulos Front Page Stories Featured Story FBI and DOJ Corruption donald trump democrats Allow Media Exception alexander downer

Image via George Papadopoulos’s LinkedIn account

Sources “familiar” with the investigation have told Fox News that the DOJ’s internal probe is focusing on transcripts of recordings of meetings between one or more government sources and former Trump campaign foreign advisor George Papadopoulos in various foreign locations. They are especially interested in “why certain exculpatory material from them was not presented in subsequent applications for surveillance warrants.”

It is common practice for government sources to record discussions with their targets. One source told Fox that “Barr and Durham are reviewing why the material was left out of applications to surveil another former Trump campaign aide, Carter Page.”

The source also said, “I think it’s the smoking gun.”

The second source said, “These recordings have exculpatory evidence. It is standard tradecraft to record conversations with someone like Papadopoulos—especially when they are overseas and there are no restrictions.” The source said the specific exculpatory evidence is: “Papadopoulos denying having any contact with the Russians to obtain the supposed “dirt” on Clinton.”

It is well-known that Link University professor Joseph Mifsud “met” with Papadopoulos at the Link campus in Rome in March 2016. The next month, they met a second time in London. Mifsud told him that the Russians had thousands of emails that would be very harmful to Hillary Clinton’s campaign. In May, Papadopoulos famously told Australian diplomat Alexander Downer over drinks at a London bar that the Russians had dirt on Hillary Clinton. He did not tell Downer that it was in the form of emails. In July, Downer notified embassy officials who passed the information to the FBI.

The DOJ is also trying to determine the exact start date of the FBI’s counter-intelligence investigation into Trump/Russia collusion. The FBI claims that it began on July 31, 2016 when they learned of Downer’s conversation with Papadopoulos.

However, there are indications that it began earlier.

Papadopoulos was pleased with this latest news. His mention of Mifsud in the tweet below is in reference to investigative reporter John Solomon’s scoop earlier this week that Mifsud’s Swiss attorney, Stefan Roh, is said to be cooperating with prosecutor John Durham’s team. Roh agreed to provide them with a “deposition Mifsud gave in the summer of 2018 about his role in the drama involving Donald Trump, Russia and the 2016 election.” I posted about this story here.

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) questioned former special counsel Robert Mueller about precisely when the FBI’s investigation began during his testimony before the House Intelligence Committee on Wednesday. Nunes said:

The FBI claims the counterintelligence investigation of the Trump campaign began on July 31, 2016, but in fact, it began before that. In June 2016, before the investigation was officially opened, Trump campaign associates Carter Page and Stephen Miller were invited to attend a symposium at Cambridge University in July 2016. Your office, however, did not investigate who was responsible for inviting these Trump associates to the symposium.

Naturally, Mueller replied, “Those areas…I’m going to stay away from.”

Papadopoulos also met with other “informants” while overseas. According to Fox:

He met with Cambridge professor and longtime FBI informant Stefan Halper and his female associate, who went under the alias Azra Turk. Papadopoulos told Fox News that he saw Turk three times in London: once over drinks, once over dinner and once with Halper. He also told Fox News back in May that he always suspected he was being recorded. Further, he tweeted during the Mueller testimony about “recordings” of his meeting with Downer.

It is unclear, at this point, which of these individuals may have recorded conversations with Papadopoulos.

Fox News contributor and former Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) had access to the transcripts of the “secretly recorded conversations between FBI informants and Papadopoulos” in his capacity as the Chairman of the House Oversight Committee.

He mentioned the existence and the significance of these transcripts earlier this year, but because this material is classified, he could not discuss the details.

In May, Gowdy appeared on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures,” and said, “If the bureau’s going to send in an informant, the informant’s going to be wired, and if the bureau is monitoring telephone calls, there’s going to be a transcript of that.” He also said they contained exculpatory information. He added:

Some of us have been fortunate enough to know whether or not those transcripts exist. But they haven’t been made public, and I think one, in particular … has the potential to actually persuade people. Very little in this Russia probe I’m afraid is going to persuade people who hate Trump or love Trump. But there is some information in these transcripts that has the potential to be a game-changer if it’s ever made public.

While we know that Durham’s team is busy trying to arrive at the truth of what happened and who was involved, it’s become frustrating receiving only the dribs and drabs of information which get leaked to well-connected reporters. The DOJ Inspector General’s report on the FISA application process, expected in May or June, has now been pushed out to September.

Unfortunately, we have no choice other than to be patient. I, for one, feel confident in Attorney General William Barr, prosecutor John Durham and DOJ IG Michael Horowitz to get the job done.

 

 

The post Sources Tell Fox News: DOJ Probe Is Focusing on Overseas Meetings Between FBI Informant and George Papadopoulos appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group papadopoulos-300x165 Sources Tell Fox News: DOJ Probe Is Focusing on Overseas Meetings Between FBI Informant and George Papadopoulos Trey Gowdy Special Counsel Robert Mueller Mueller Investigation joseph mifsud george papadopoulos Front Page Stories Featured Story FBI and DOJ Corruption donald trump democrats Allow Media Exception alexander downer  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Facts First: CNN Has a Problematic History When It Comes to Fostering a Climate of Hate and Anti-Semitism

Westlake Legal Group CNN-620x349 Facts First: CNN Has a Problematic History When It Comes to Fostering a Climate of Hate and Anti-Semitism Social Media Politics North Carolina New York Media journalism Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post democrats Culture CNN anti-semitism Allow Media Exception #FactsFirst

Red State‘s Bonchie wrote a must-read post earlier today about how CNN announced on Thursday the resignation of photo editor and occasional news article writer Mohammed Elshamy after virulently anti-Semitic posts were discovered on his Twitter feed.

It probably won’t surprise many of you to find out that this isn’t the first time the network has had to part ways with an employee who has engaged in anti-Semitism.

Ed Driscoll at Instapundit‘s blog writes:

A week ago, Jewish Insider reported that “Former CNN commentator Marc Lamont Hill claimed that news outlets like NBC and ABC were ‘Zionist organizations’ that produced ‘Zionist content,’ during a panel on Friday at the annual Netroots Nation summit held by progressive activists in Philadelphia…Hill’s comments came less than a year after he lost his CNN perch after calling for a ‘free Palestine from the river to the sea,’ during an appearance at the U.N. The statement was interpreted by many as a call for the elimination of Israel, something Hill denied.”

In 2014, the Washington Free Beacon reported that “CNN International correspondent Diana Magnay referred to a group of Israelis as ‘scum’ after she claimed that they were standing on a hill near the town of Sderot cheering as bombs landed in Gaza, according to a screen-shot of the comment captured by National Review.”

When CNN’s senior editor of Mideast affairs Octavia Nasr was fired in 2010, for tweeting, “Sad to hear of the passing of Sayyed Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah.. One of Hezbollah’s giants I respect a lot,” Cal Thomas opined, “The dirty little secret here is that she was simply expressing viewpoints that is widespread not only in the American media but much of the Euro media. […] Christiane Amanpour [CNN international journo] holds many of these views as well, I would daresay, but she is smart enough and sophisticated enough not to stick them on a Tweet.”

Yep. Like Democratic politicians in Washington, D.C. (like, for example, the Congressional Black Caucus), some liberal journalists and commentators at major news networks are better at hiding their anti-Semitism than others.

As Bonchie noted earlier in his write-up, CNN‘s chief media firefighter Brian Stelter has barely touched this issue. We know that would not be the case if this had happened at Fox News, of which Stelter has been unrelentingly critical:

Would Stelter and the rest of CNN shrug this off if any other outlet made this mistake? Of course they wouldn’t. Imagine for a second that The Daily Caller hired a white supremacist, even inadvertently. Would CNN at least put out a story detailing what happened? Would there be a myriad of scolding tweets from CNN personalities? The answer is unequivocally yes, so while I can perhaps believe that CNN didn’t intentionally hire this guy, their hypocrisy is glaring enough to not ignore.

Not only that, but consider this, too, in the context of CNN‘s history of flirting with anti-Semitism: Not only have they had these hate-filled individuals on their staff, but they also provide cover for anti-Semitical politicians, as they have done for Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Rashida Tlaib (D-MI).

As I wrote last week on the issue of Stelter backpatting himself over his network’s definitive labeling Trump’s controversial tweets about The Squad as “racist”, CNN’s standards on how to label controversial comments made by politicians is staggeringly inconsistent.

They’ll call Trump’s tweets “racist”, but when it comes to anti-Semitical comments made by Omar and Tlaib, qualifiers similar to “critics say” and “some suggest” always apply in their straight news reporting.

Lastly, there is this, too:

Yeah. Odd, that.

—————-
— Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 15+ 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 Facts First: CNN Has a Problematic History When It Comes to Fostering a Climate of Hate and Anti-Semitism appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group CNN-300x169 Facts First: CNN Has a Problematic History When It Comes to Fostering a Climate of Hate and Anti-Semitism Social Media Politics North Carolina New York Media journalism Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post democrats Culture CNN anti-semitism Allow Media Exception #FactsFirst  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

A Delusional Pelosi Claims Mueller Hearing Proved Trump Obstructed Justice, but Let’s See What Mueller Said

Westlake Legal Group NancyPelosi-AP-620x352 A Delusional Pelosi Claims Mueller Hearing Proved Trump Obstructed Justice, but Let’s See What Mueller Said Robert Mueller Politics obstruction of justice Nancy Pelosi Mueller Investigation Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats Allow Media Exception

If you sat through the slog that was the hearings about the Mueller investigation with Robert Mueller, you would have pulled away with very little in the way of useful information, at least if you were a Democrat. If you were a Republican, it reaffirmed what you already knew; that this three-year investigation that cost us $20 million was a shame of a desperation move by Democrats to impeach Trump.

Even CNN admitted that Trump came out as the clear winner of that hearing.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi apparently came away with an entirely different take. According to her, Mueller “confirmed in the public mind that the president has obstructed justice.”

Yeah, I’m not sure how she walked away with that either. Not only did the hearing not give off that impression at all, but Mueller himself was very clear that no obstruction took place.

Just so we’re all on the same page, here’s Mueller giving a very direct answer to the question “at any time during the investigation was your investigation curtailed or stopped?”

Just to be clear, and because some of the Democrats seem to be very confused here, Mueller’s answer was “no.”

No obstruction took place. Period. Done. Finito.

I actually thought after the Democrats received their proverbial whooping after the Mueller hearings had concluded that they would walk away. It would appear, however, that Pelosi has no intention of letting dead horses lie. She’s going to beat the corpse of the Mueller investigation until it’s nothing but atoms.

It’s interesting to me that Democrats are far more interested in a failed investigation, and would make up blatant lies about the conclusion of said investigation than they are with the current crop of 2020 Democrats who are running against Trump.

As I wrote earlier this week, this doesn’t speak well to the Democrats faith in their chances in 2020. They’d rather continue to focus on an impeachment that definitely isn’t going to happen now than actually give attention to their last best chance at kicking Trump out of the White House.

 

The post A Delusional Pelosi Claims Mueller Hearing Proved Trump Obstructed Justice, but Let’s See What Mueller Said appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group NancyPelosi-AP-300x170 A Delusional Pelosi Claims Mueller Hearing Proved Trump Obstructed Justice, but Let’s See What Mueller Said Robert Mueller Politics obstruction of justice Nancy Pelosi Mueller Investigation Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats Allow Media Exception  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

The Democrats Still Appear Shocked That Robert Mueller Gave Them Nothing

Westlake Legal Group jerry-nadler-monkey-face-j-620x317 The Democrats Still Appear Shocked That Robert Mueller Gave Them Nothing Robert Mueller Media Jerry Nadler impeachment House Democrats Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats Allow Media Exception

Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., gives his opening statement as former special counsel Robert Mueller testifies before the House Judiciary Committee hearing on his report on Russian election interference, on Capitol Hill, Wednesday, July 24, 2019, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

In the fallout from the ill-fated testimony from Robert Mueller, we are seeing reports from media outlets who are by and large allies of the Democratic Party detailing just how disappointed the Democrats are that they couldn’t get a definite impeachment case from the special counsel.

In reports from CNN, Washington PostThe Hill, and the New York Times, the picture we see painted is one of a caucus of Democrats who appear to have actually expected Mueller to give them something new and exciting.

From the New York Times:

Liberal House members who have been agitating for impeachment were buoyed by Mr. Mueller’s nearly seven hours of testimony, asserting, despite modest viewership numbers and no dramatic revelations, that the former special counsel’s words confirmed their case that Mr. Trump had tried to obstruct justice. They showed signs of momentum.

Representative Jerrold Nadler of New York, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, has gradually become convinced that his panel should proceed with impeachment hearings and do so as expeditiously as possible, though he has not stated so publicly, according to lawmakers and aides familiar with his thinking. In a closed room of lawmakers on Wednesday evening after the hearing, he broached the idea that House committees could soon begin contemplating articles of impeachment, though Speaker Nancy Pelosi has pushed back on the idea of quick action.

At The Hill:

Several rank-and-file Democrats in the House are feeling deflated over former special counsel Robert Mueller‘s public testimony, with some blaming the media and their own party for overhyping hearings they say fell short of expectations.

While many Democrats publicly heralded Mueller’s testimony before the House Judiciary and Intelligence committees as a resounding success, some privately expressed disappointment in his, at times, shaky performance, the brevity of his answers and the lack of a big moment that would have shifted the electorate’s sentiment on whether President Trumpwas guilty of obstruction.

“Remember, I spent months trying to tell people that there will be no headlines out of this,” Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), a member of the Intelligence Committee, told The Hill. “Quite frankly, I think it was both the Democrats and the media that sort of created this narrative that there was going to be some bombshell from Bob Mueller, there is going to be a bombshell from his deputies — there is not going to be a bombshell from him.

At CNN:

House Democrats who are publicly and privately agitating to begin impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump are growing worried that their time is running short — and that they are missing key opportunities to give them a clear opening to mount a formal probe.

New York Rep. Jerry Nadler, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee who would be in charge of leading an impeachment inquiry, has repeatedly made a behind-the-scenes case to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and others to begin a probe, according to multiple people familiar with the matter.

And at the Washington Post:

House Democrats are struggling to figure out their next move against President Trump after their highly anticipated hearing with Robert S. Mueller III fell flat, forcing some Democrats to second-guess their strategy while aggravating divisions in the party over impeachment.

Several centrist Democrats seized on the absence of a major revelation to argue it was time to end House investigations into whether Trump tried to obstruct the former special counsel’s probe and pivot to legislation.

Anyone who was looking for the smoking gun yesterday didn’t get it,” said Rep. Anthony Brindisi (D-N.Y.), who ousted a Republican incumbent by fewer than 500 votes in last year’s midterm elections. “It’s time to move on and focus on getting some bills passed here that can get signed into law.

It would appear that the most liberal of Democrats – largely those in deep blue districts – believed that Mueller was going to deliver the goods on Donald Trump during that hearing. It could be that they represent a reality-rejecting segment of the population, one that has repeatedly insisted that Trump worked hand-in-hand with Russia to win the election, repeatedly committed and commits crimes against the office and the country, and will surely fall if they file the articles of impeachment together.

The ones cautioning against it are many of the leadership Democrats and Democrats whose districts are more representative of the American public: Diverse in opinion and wary of extreme action.

The unity some might find in being the opposition party is fading fast, and the result is a party that will be unable to score a 2020 upset against the incumbent. The longer-serving members of the House know this, and they know that they have to try to appear moderate and sane. But many of the Democrats pushing for impeachment are also relying too much on media and social media opinions telling them just how right they are.

There is a large swath of the American public who does not want this, and really just want more sanity from Washington. Impeachment will hurt them, but they don’t buy it. Not yet.

The post The Democrats Still Appear Shocked That Robert Mueller Gave Them Nothing appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group jerry-nadler-monkey-face-j-300x153 The Democrats Still Appear Shocked That Robert Mueller Gave Them Nothing Robert Mueller Media Jerry Nadler impeachment House Democrats Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats Allow Media Exception  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

The Sanders Campaign Allegedly Isn’t Holding Up Labor Agreements and Is Firing Union Staffers Who Complain

Westlake Legal Group bernie-sanders-flickr-cc-620x349 The Sanders Campaign Allegedly Isn’t Holding Up Labor Agreements and Is Firing Union Staffers Who Complain unions union Politics Labor Front Page Stories Featured Story elections democrats charges campaign Bernie Sanders Allow Media Exception 2020

Watching the hard left collapse in on itself is one of those simple pleasures in life that make it all worth it. Especially when its the campaign of America’s top “democratic socialist” and 2020 contender Sen. Bernie Sanders who has found himself being charged by labor unions for not upholding agreements with union members he employs.

According to The Hill, the charges claim the Sanders campaign allegedly fired union employees who were trying to push the campaign to uphold contract agreements the campaign had made with the union. The campaign was failing to do so, and when union workers complained, the campaign reportedly had them fired:

The charge, which was filed with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) by a former campaign employee on July 22, also alleges that the campaign violated a collective bargaining agreement with unionized workers by making staffers work additional days and failing to provide commensurate days off.

When the individual asked the campaign to abide by the terms of the collective bargaining agreement, management retaliated, the charge alleges.

The person who submitted the charge has so far remained anonymous but alleges that they were attacked after sending the email requesting compliance.

“[Campaign management] retaliated against me when I organized the bargaining unit and sent an email requesting compliance with the [collective bargaining agreement],” the anonymous person wrote in the charge according to The Hill.

The Sanders campaign has been plagued with union problems in this election cycle. Earlier this week, Sanders ran into a payment controversy where he wasn’t dishing out $15/hr to his employees. In order to fix the problem, Sanders promised to pay his staff the full $15, but in order to do so, had to fire some staffers and increase hours on the ones that remained.

Some socialist.

As I wrote of the debacle, Sanders continues to prove that Sanders is proof that socialism can’t work and that even the most ardent of socialists don’t truly believe in socialism when it comes to their own personal business.

 

The post The Sanders Campaign Allegedly Isn’t Holding Up Labor Agreements and Is Firing Union Staffers Who Complain appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group bernie-sanders-flickr-cc-300x169 The Sanders Campaign Allegedly Isn’t Holding Up Labor Agreements and Is Firing Union Staffers Who Complain unions union Politics Labor Front Page Stories Featured Story elections democrats charges campaign Bernie Sanders Allow Media Exception 2020  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Ted Lieu Spins Wild Conspiracy Theory To Explain Robert Mueller’s Befuddlement

Westlake Legal Group ted-lieu-j-620x317 Ted Lieu Spins Wild Conspiracy Theory To Explain Robert Mueller’s Befuddlement Wolf Blitzer ted lieu Special Counsel Robert Mueller Politics obstruction of justice Front Page Stories Featured Story democrats Congress CNN Allow Media Exception

A Wednesday’s Congressional goat-rope involving House Democrats and a befuddled Robert Mueller, the Democrats tried time and again to elicit from Mueller some new bit of information or sound bite that they could use to re-energize the push for impeachment by the radical fringe of a radical fringe party. The closest they came was when Ted Lieu questioned Mueller. Lieu walked Mueller through his understanding of how President Trump managed to obstruct justice while not actually obstructing anything. Mueller, who stares at the report of which he was allegedly the architect much as your average hog would stare at a Timex, reflexively answers “yes.” Then Lieu asks Mueller if the only reason he did not charge Trump with obstruction was the existence of Office of Legal Counsel guidance that says a sitting president may not be indicted by Department of Justice. Mueller says “yes.” This is the video cued up to that exchange:

This is significant. Because not only does the report declare that no determination was reached on obstruction, Attorney General Bill Barr testified to Congress that in briefings on the report that Mueller had on several occasions been asked if the OLC opinion was what kept him from doing his job:

[W]e specifically asked Robert Mueller about the OLC opinion and whether or not Robert Mueller was taking the position that Robert Mueller would have found a crime but for the existence of the OLC opinion, and he made it very clear several times that that was not his position. He was not saying that but for the OLC opinion he would have found a crime. He made it clear that he had not made the determination that there was a crime.

Later, Mueller corrected his statement.

Yesterday, Lieu was on Wolf Blitzer’s little show and spun up a conspiracy theory.

 

 

BLITZER: It’s a serious problem. You were at the center yesterday of one of the most dramatic moments of the hearings with Robert Mueller. You have to walk back this testimony to you in response to your questioning that the reason that they didn’t formally indict the President was because of the Justice Department guidelines, a sitting president can’t be indicted.

But you say Mueller fully understood your question. Doesn’t Mueller’s correction, which he later provided, prove otherwise?

LIEU: This is what’s so odd about that exchange. Special Counsel Robert Mueller agreed that the OLC opinion prevented a sitting president from being indicted. And then the republican member after me asked him a series of questions to try to get him to walk it back, and he did not do that. And then it wasn’t until there was a recess in the Intel Committee that he started walk some of that back. I don’t know who got to him. I don’t know who talked to him, but that was very odd what he did.

BLITZER: Well, what are you suggesting? Because he said he misspoke, he didn’t understand or whatever it was. That’s why he wanted to clarify and walk back his response to your question. Are you saying he only did that because of pressure from someone?

LIEU: I don’t know. But he clearly answered the way he answered to me, and then he had numerous times to walk that back by the next republican member who asked a series of questions on exact same issue trying to get him to walk it back. So I don’t really understand what happened.

But we all agree and even Robert Mueller would agree that there is an OLC, Department of Justice opinion that says the sitting President of the United States cannot be indicted.

BLITZER: Yes. That’s what he repeatedly said that. He was working under those guidelines.

Mueller declined to even read from his report in response to a lot of questioning from the democrats. His answers were short, sometimes stilted. Do you think he did a disservice to his report during those hours of testimony yesterday?

LIEU: I would have liked if Special Counsel Robert Mueller was more talkative, but he did say yes and true to a large number of devastating facts. He also admitted in my questioning to the first two elements of obstruction of justice that were satisfied and then on the third element, intent, I simply read from his report, and it said, quote, substantial evidence, unquote, of evidence for intent.

So, basically, it’s as if Robert Mueller says, look, here is a piece of bread. I’m putting a piece of ham on that bread. Then I’m going to put another piece of bread on the ham, and we say that’s a ham sandwich. And he goes, no, I’m not going to call it that. Well, it’s a ham sandwich.

So that’s essentially what he did. He laid out the evidence and it meets the elements of obstruction of justice.

BLITZER: The House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, says it’s still not time to open impeachment proceedings in the House. Is this debate more about a lack of political will than a lack of evidence?

LIEU: Speaker Pelosi is an amazing speaker. I’m honored to be on her leadership team. She’s going to make this decision and consultation with the democratic caucus. And whatever decision she makes, I’m going to respect.

BLITZER: How unlikely is it that your committee, the Judiciary Committee, would launch a formal impeachment inquiry on its own without a full House vote?

LIEU: We’re not going to go rogue, Wolf. Everything that the Judiciary Committee does will have the blessing of Speaker Pelosi.

I’m going to tell you what’s going to come next. We’re going to file litigation to get the grand jury materials that we have not yet been able to see. We’re going to file litigation to compel Don McGahn to come and testify publicly before the Judiciary Committee, and we’ve asked Hope Hicks to come back and testify because she lied to us the first time that she testified.

This is nuts. What happened was pretty obvious. Mueller just gave an incorrect answer. And the technique Lieu used is one that I used frequently as an investigator for the Army’s Inspector General. Ask a series of questions that require all “yes” or all “no” answers, toss in your conclusion at the end and the subject will invariably answer the way he has before even when it carries an admission of guilt. After the break, Mueller corrected the record. The key factor here is that there was no other place in his testimony where Mueller diverged from the report in his answers.

Lieu, however, sees himself as some kind of a political wizard who elicited a game changing admission from Mueller…when no one else could…and who was foiled by unknown forces “got to” Mueller. It isn’t true. None of it.

The post Ted Lieu Spins Wild Conspiracy Theory To Explain Robert Mueller’s Befuddlement appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group ted-lieu-j-300x153 Ted Lieu Spins Wild Conspiracy Theory To Explain Robert Mueller’s Befuddlement Wolf Blitzer ted lieu Special Counsel Robert Mueller Politics obstruction of justice Front Page Stories Featured Story democrats Congress CNN Allow Media Exception  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Ted Lieu Spins Wild Conspiracy Theory To Explain Robert Mueller’s Befuddlement

Westlake Legal Group ted-lieu-j-620x317 Ted Lieu Spins Wild Conspiracy Theory To Explain Robert Mueller’s Befuddlement Wolf Blitzer ted lieu Special Counsel Robert Mueller Politics obstruction of justice Front Page Stories Featured Story democrats Congress CNN Allow Media Exception

A Wednesday’s Congressional goat-rope involving House Democrats and a befuddled Robert Mueller, the Democrats tried time and again to elicit from Mueller some new bit of information or sound bite that they could use to re-energize the push for impeachment by the radical fringe of a radical fringe party. The closest they came was when Ted Lieu questioned Mueller. Lieu walked Mueller through his understanding of how President Trump managed to obstruct justice while not actually obstructing anything. Mueller, who stares at the report of which he was allegedly the architect much as your average hog would stare at a Timex, reflexively answers “yes.” Then Lieu asks Mueller if the only reason he did not charge Trump with obstruction was the existence of Office of Legal Counsel guidance that says a sitting president may not be indicted by Department of Justice. Mueller says “yes.” This is the video cued up to that exchange:

This is significant. Because not only does the report declare that no determination was reached on obstruction, Attorney General Bill Barr testified to Congress that in briefings on the report that Mueller had on several occasions been asked if the OLC opinion was what kept him from doing his job:

[W]e specifically asked Robert Mueller about the OLC opinion and whether or not Robert Mueller was taking the position that Robert Mueller would have found a crime but for the existence of the OLC opinion, and he made it very clear several times that that was not his position. He was not saying that but for the OLC opinion he would have found a crime. He made it clear that he had not made the determination that there was a crime.

Later, Mueller corrected his statement.

Yesterday, Lieu was on Wolf Blitzer’s little show and spun up a conspiracy theory.

 

 

BLITZER: It’s a serious problem. You were at the center yesterday of one of the most dramatic moments of the hearings with Robert Mueller. You have to walk back this testimony to you in response to your questioning that the reason that they didn’t formally indict the President was because of the Justice Department guidelines, a sitting president can’t be indicted.

But you say Mueller fully understood your question. Doesn’t Mueller’s correction, which he later provided, prove otherwise?

LIEU: This is what’s so odd about that exchange. Special Counsel Robert Mueller agreed that the OLC opinion prevented a sitting president from being indicted. And then the republican member after me asked him a series of questions to try to get him to walk it back, and he did not do that. And then it wasn’t until there was a recess in the Intel Committee that he started walk some of that back. I don’t know who got to him. I don’t know who talked to him, but that was very odd what he did.

BLITZER: Well, what are you suggesting? Because he said he misspoke, he didn’t understand or whatever it was. That’s why he wanted to clarify and walk back his response to your question. Are you saying he only did that because of pressure from someone?

LIEU: I don’t know. But he clearly answered the way he answered to me, and then he had numerous times to walk that back by the next republican member who asked a series of questions on exact same issue trying to get him to walk it back. So I don’t really understand what happened.

But we all agree and even Robert Mueller would agree that there is an OLC, Department of Justice opinion that says the sitting President of the United States cannot be indicted.

BLITZER: Yes. That’s what he repeatedly said that. He was working under those guidelines.

Mueller declined to even read from his report in response to a lot of questioning from the democrats. His answers were short, sometimes stilted. Do you think he did a disservice to his report during those hours of testimony yesterday?

LIEU: I would have liked if Special Counsel Robert Mueller was more talkative, but he did say yes and true to a large number of devastating facts. He also admitted in my questioning to the first two elements of obstruction of justice that were satisfied and then on the third element, intent, I simply read from his report, and it said, quote, substantial evidence, unquote, of evidence for intent.

So, basically, it’s as if Robert Mueller says, look, here is a piece of bread. I’m putting a piece of ham on that bread. Then I’m going to put another piece of bread on the ham, and we say that’s a ham sandwich. And he goes, no, I’m not going to call it that. Well, it’s a ham sandwich.

So that’s essentially what he did. He laid out the evidence and it meets the elements of obstruction of justice.

BLITZER: The House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, says it’s still not time to open impeachment proceedings in the House. Is this debate more about a lack of political will than a lack of evidence?

LIEU: Speaker Pelosi is an amazing speaker. I’m honored to be on her leadership team. She’s going to make this decision and consultation with the democratic caucus. And whatever decision she makes, I’m going to respect.

BLITZER: How unlikely is it that your committee, the Judiciary Committee, would launch a formal impeachment inquiry on its own without a full House vote?

LIEU: We’re not going to go rogue, Wolf. Everything that the Judiciary Committee does will have the blessing of Speaker Pelosi.

I’m going to tell you what’s going to come next. We’re going to file litigation to get the grand jury materials that we have not yet been able to see. We’re going to file litigation to compel Don McGahn to come and testify publicly before the Judiciary Committee, and we’ve asked Hope Hicks to come back and testify because she lied to us the first time that she testified.

This is nuts. What happened was pretty obvious. Mueller just gave an incorrect answer. And the technique Lieu used is one that I used frequently as an investigator for the Army’s Inspector General. Ask a series of questions that require all “yes” or all “no” answers, toss in your conclusion at the end and the subject will invariably answer the way he has before even when it carries an admission of guilt. After the break, Mueller corrected the record. The key factor here is that there was no other place in his testimony where Mueller diverged from the report in his answers.

Lieu, however, sees himself as some kind of a political wizard who elicited a game changing admission from Mueller…when no one else could…and who was foiled by unknown forces “got to” Mueller. It isn’t true. None of it.

The post Ted Lieu Spins Wild Conspiracy Theory To Explain Robert Mueller’s Befuddlement appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group ted-lieu-j-300x153 Ted Lieu Spins Wild Conspiracy Theory To Explain Robert Mueller’s Befuddlement Wolf Blitzer ted lieu Special Counsel Robert Mueller Politics obstruction of justice Front Page Stories Featured Story democrats Congress CNN Allow Media Exception  Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com