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 "Front Page Stories" (Page 18)

Beto: Trump Is Hitler

Westlake Legal Group Screen-Shot-2019-10-22-at-3.21.21-PM Beto: Trump Is Hitler Hitler Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats big lie Beto O Rourke Allow Media Exception 2020

Screenshot from this video

What do you do when you’re a Democratic candidate at 1% and can’t seem to find any traction in your campaign?

You’ve tried pitching abortion to the moment of birth and “hell yeah, I’m coming for your guns.”

But that doesn’t do it for you because the liberal media is behind other candidates.

Where can you go when you’ve already gone so low?

Well, if you’re Beto O’Rourke, you go to the last resort, violate Godwin’s Rule and compare President Donald Trump to Adolf Hitler.

CNN’s Wolf Blitzer asked if he stood by his earlier claim comparing Trump to the Nazis during an interview with Al Sharpton and O’Rourke doubled down.

O’Rourke let loose, repeating a string of debunked lies and blaming Trump for the El Paso mass shooting.

From Daily Caller:

“Find me a better analogy of another leader of a western democracy describing people of one religion as defective or dangerous and that is what the president did when it came to Muslims, seeking to ban them and repeating the lie that Mexican immigrants pose a violent risk to this country,” O’Rourke said.

But even Wolf wasn’t buying it. He asked if O’Rourke understood the criticism in making comparisons to the Nazis or Hitler. “Do you understand that at least most people say that is unacceptable?”

But O’Rourke justified it.

“It is the comparison of last resort. And that is where we are,” siad O’Rourke. “And I don’t mean the last resort politically or last resort in terms of defeating the president in November but the last resort for this country that is descending into an open racism and intolerance and violence led by the president.”

O’Rourke then repeated the lie that Trump said Neo-Nazis and Klansmen were “very fine people.”

So he’s comparing the president of the United States to a socialist dictator who put people in real concentration camps, killed millions and started World War II engulfing a good portion of the world?

Indeed, that is the comparison of the “last resort” and that’s where Beto is at. He’s so desperate at 1%, he’s played every card and he doesn’t know what else to do. Where does he go after this, too, fails him?

As with anyone who breaks Godwin’s Rule, it says a lot more about him, with the minimizing the Holocaust and the horrors of WWII by the comparison.

Not to mention that the “intolerance and open violence” seems a constant feature of the radical left as we’ve seen, as the mob who attacked Trump supporters outside his recent Minnesota rally demonstrated.

Warning for offensive images and language:

The post Beto: Trump Is Hitler appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group Screen-Shot-2019-10-22-at-3.21.21-PM-300x186 Beto: Trump Is Hitler Hitler Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats big lie Beto O Rourke Allow Media Exception 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

BREAKING: Bill Taylor Testified to Adam Schiff Today, Here’s What the Democrat’s Great Hope for Impeachment Said

Westlake Legal Group smug-schiff-620x317 BREAKING: Bill Taylor Testified to Adam Schiff Today, Here’s What the Democrat’s Great Hope for Impeachment Said Ukraine ted lieu quid pro quo Politics phone call Overstated Nothing New joke Joe Biden hunter biden Front Page Stories Front Page Dud donald trump democrats Bill Taylor Allow Media Exception adam schiff

(AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File)

Earlier this morning, I was on Twitter and spotted this claim from Rep. Ted Lieu:

Notice the complete lack of specifics from Lieu, who hasn’t been shy before about helping spread leaks from these hearings that he feels are damaging to President Trump. That should have been the first tip off that there’s some posturing going on here.

Now, we are getting our first details and this appears to be as much of a dud as Kurt Volker’s testimony was.

Because this is CNN, they try to word it in the most sinister way, but the details in the article don’t back up much of that characterization, as we’ll get to in a moment. Further, the idea that Trump was pushing for something that could help him “politically” is pure editorializing. You can make that assumption, but there’s no evidence of that provided.

Let’s dive in here.

In a lengthy and detailed opening statement, Taylor said that he and Sondland spoke by phone about why the aid was frozen, and Sondland cited the need for Ukraine to open an investigation among other reasons, according to the sources. Sondland told Taylor that the investigations potentially included both Ukraine’s involvement in the 2016 election and Burisma, the Ukrainian energy company that hired former Vice President Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden, the sources said.

As has been previously stated by the administration, the aid was in question due to three reasons – Investigations into 2016 behavior, Europe not doing enough, and corruption in general.

So while CNN wants to paint this as definitive, it’s actually anything but. In fact, Sondland testified under oath that even his statements to Taylor about the investigations into 2016 and Burisma were speculation.

Asked about Taylor’s comments, a source familiar with Sondland’s testimony said that Sondland cited, in addition to the investigations, that the aid may have been frozen because the Europeans weren’t giving Ukraine enough and corruption in general. The source said Sondland was only speculating when he referenced the political investigations into the 2016 election and Burisma.

“He made very clear in his testimony that nobody would give him a straight answer” about why the aid was being held up, the source said about Sondland’s testimony.

If you are asking yourself what’s new here, you aren’t alone. We already knew what Taylor thought was going on, largely spurned by things he was reading in the press and secondary conversations. In the end, though, Taylor’s impressions are irrelevant unless backed up by evidence and he provides none. Laughably, he didn’t provide any documents in his testimony at all.

Taylor is not bringing any new documents to the committee, and he will just reference those that have already been made public, the source said.

In other words, Taylor’s entire contribution to this mess adds up to his impressions about conversations that are already public. No proof of any political motive is provided and that’s the required element here to make any of this improper.

Nowhere in the testimony is it indicated (and if it existed, Democrats would be leaking it) that Taylor possessed anything proving an actual improper quid pro quo. The 2020 election is not mentioned. Political motives are not mentioned. Those need to exist to prove impropriety because as I pointed out in previous writings, all foreign policy is a quid pro quo. Screaming “quid pro quo” over and over is not an argument for impeachment. One can assume bad motives on Trump’s part, but that would need to be proven.

This was the Democrats’ biggest hope for an impeachment bombshell. Bill Taylor was supposed to come in, based on previously released text messages, and provide some semblance of evidence that Trump had done something illegal (or even improper) here. Instead, it seems he provided nothing of value at all outside of giving CNN and Democrats a few lines to mold into their narrative.

Things are becoming more and more clear as these “witnesses” shuffle through. There’s nothing here. We have some people who heard a phone call and made some personal judgements. None of that is dispositive of anything. Democrats are backed into a corner and will have to move forward with impeachment, but it’s going to come in the form of nothing but innuendo and non-provable supposition. It’s the Mueller investigation all over again.

————————————————

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 BREAKING: Bill Taylor Testified to Adam Schiff Today, Here’s What the Democrat’s Great Hope for Impeachment Said appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group gs-adam-schiff-300x200 BREAKING: Bill Taylor Testified to Adam Schiff Today, Here’s What the Democrat’s Great Hope for Impeachment Said Ukraine ted lieu quid pro quo Politics phone call Overstated Nothing New joke Joe Biden hunter biden Front Page Stories Front Page Dud donald trump democrats Bill Taylor Allow Media Exception adam schiff   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

BREAKING: Trans Activist Jessica Yaniv Loses Court Battle Against Estheticians That Wouldn’t Wax His Genitals

Westlake Legal Group 260c0824-7cf2-4300-873d-0b4f8bf402c4-620x317 BREAKING: Trans Activist Jessica Yaniv Loses Court Battle Against Estheticians That Wouldn’t Wax His Genitals Women transgender Politics men LGBT jessica yaniv Human Rights Front Page Stories court case Canada Allow Media Exception

FILE – In this May 17, 2016 file photo, a new sticker is placed on the door at the ceremonial opening of a gender neutral bathroom at Nathan Hale High School in Seattle. A government official says the Trump administration will revoke guidelines that say transgender students should be allowed to use bathrooms and locker rooms matching their chosen gender identity. (AP Photo/Elaine Thompson, File)

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) has announced that the “human rights” case brought against a number of estheticians by transgender activist Jessica Yaniv has ended with the court ruling in favor of the estheticians.

The JCCF represented over ten estheticians that Yaniv had brought complaints against. They noted that their victory entails that a service provider, like any other situation involving genitals, must first provide consent, which Yaniv did not have:

The decision noted, “human rights legislation does not require a service provider to wax a type of genitals they are not trained for and have not consented to wax.” The decision further found that the complainant Jessica Yaniv “engaged in improper conduct”, “filed complaints for improper purposes”, and concluded Yaniv’s testimony was “disingenuous and self-serving.” Finally, noted the Tribunal, Yaniv was “evasive and argumentative and contradicted herself” while giving evidence.

What’s more, Yaniv has been ordered by the court to pay $2,000 each to three of the five estheticians he went after.

Yaniv attempted to use the argument that these estheticians, all immigrants, were using their religion to discriminate against him. However, the JCCF stated that no woman should be forced to touch a man’s genitals, and the courts seemed to agree.

“Self-identification does not erase physiological reality,” stated Jay Cameron, the Justice Centre’s Litigation Manager, and counsel for the estheticians. “Our clients do not offer the service requested. No woman should be compelled to touch male genitals against her will, irrespective of how the owner of the genitals identifies.”

Yaniv was previously in the headlines for other bizarre behavior. Before this court case, he was attempting to organize a “topless” event for children where parents were not allowed.

(READ: Trans Activist Is Hosting A “Topless,” No Parents Allowed Swimming Event For Girls As Young As Twelve)

 

The post BREAKING: Trans Activist Jessica Yaniv Loses Court Battle Against Estheticians That Wouldn’t Wax His Genitals appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group 260c0824-7cf2-4300-873d-0b4f8bf402c4-300x153 BREAKING: Trans Activist Jessica Yaniv Loses Court Battle Against Estheticians That Wouldn’t Wax His Genitals Women transgender Politics men LGBT jessica yaniv Human Rights Front Page Stories court case Canada Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Schiffing Gears – The Media is Intent on Making Impeachment Valid While Ignoring the Ever-Changing Storyline

Westlake Legal Group AS Schiffing Gears – The Media is Intent on Making Impeachment Valid While Ignoring the Ever-Changing Storyline whistleblower Ukraine schiff polls Politics Media Impeachment of President Trump impeachment Government Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats Allow Media Exception adam schiff Abuse of Power 2020

They will make this into a vital story even though the evidence continues to be elusive.

The press continues to loudly bang the kettle drums of impeachment and insist there is copious evidence to justify the proceedings. The latest is the strained attempt to show there is a shift among Republicans regarding impeachment. In a not at all desperate play CNN tries to insist that among ‘’moderate and liberal potential Republicans’’ there has been a shift of fifteen percentage points within this small subgroup. Ostensibly this represents…something.

Meanwhile what the press continues to ignore in noteworthy fashion is that the main figure in all of this impeachment hysteria — Rep. Adam Schiff — has consistently been starkly inconsistent in his claims. On nearly a weekly basis Schiff has made wholesale changes to his audacious claims, but two things have remained consistent; he continues to storm forward with impeachment invective, and the media will not look critically at his storyline.

One of the harbingers of someone having a story that is lacking in facts is when their claims and evidence changes on the fly. When new language or altered narratives become apparent then you are certain that they do not have all of the facts on their side. Take a look at the ever-evolving timeline of Adam Schiff on the Ukrainian phone ‘’scandal’’.

President Trump supposedly threatened the Ukrainian leader eight times during their call. This was said to be a grievous abuse of power. However once the President agreed to release the transcripts from his call that ‘’eight times’’ talking-point dissipated almost instantly.

Schiff pivoted away from that accusation, because – as he stated numerous times – the real criminal behavior was in the quid pro quo that Trump hand supposedly placed on his receiving help. Once that was seen as not entirely in the body of the call then Schiff came forward with the rather surprising announcement — there does not need to be a quid pro quo in order to justify impeachment.

Then we had the completely disqualifying behavior Schiff displayed during one hearing on the matter when he began quoting numerous lines from the transcript that did not at all appear in said transcript. His impotent claim that what he engaged in as ‘’parody’’, in order to illustrate what was ‘’really’’ said in the call should have seen him scorched across the journalistic universe. Instead the media backed him up and explained to us neophytes that it was a dramatic device.

Less reported was his coming out after the hearing and declaring that the Director of National Intelligence, Joseph Maguire had voluntarily decided to come forward and testify. This, after Schiff had boldly accused Maguire of withholding the whistleblower complaint. Schiff then corrected himself and had to admit that Maguire appeared as a result of Schiff issuing a subpoena. It was clear that Schiff attempted to paint Maguire as another name who willingly was coming out in opposition to the President.

This also cuts to another dose of subterfuge by Schiff. He attempted to sell this lie about the whistleblower’s testimony being buried by administration officials when we have come to know that Schiff had been in contact with the whistleblower all along, and quite probably helped to craft the complaint. “We have not spoken directly with the whistleblower, we would like to.” This had been Schiff’s claim repeatedly early in this process. Now we see this too was a bold lie.

Even one of Schiff’s loudest declarations over the years has been undone by his actions. All during the failed collusion investigation, Schiff was a loud proponent of transparency. It was his favorite cause. But now, after the fractures in the testimony of the whistleblower have been exposed, and the individual is said to be a hyper-partisan Trump opponent while heavily lawyered up with Democrat representation, Schiff does not want to expose his tool. He has called for the whistleblower to be completely shielded, to only give a written account, and to face no cross-examinations.

This is not the move of someone supremely confident in a testimony. Ever since the connection to Schiff has been revealed the Democrats now are holding back on the testimony, depositions, and transcripts. A curious behavior, after demanding the whistleblower be heard in unencumbered fashion before the Committee.

But the press, in its always incurious fashion, sees no reason at all to look into any of these inconsistencies. As CNN has become the All Impeachment, All The Time network you might think there would be a dedicated mind or two looking into the matter critically. Instead it is all pom-poms and cheerleading pyramids, as they root on their star quarterback Adam Schiff. Nevermind that he is ripping pages out of his playbook on an almost daily basis.

The post Schiffing Gears – The Media is Intent on Making Impeachment Valid While Ignoring the Ever-Changing Storyline appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group AS-300x187 Schiffing Gears – The Media is Intent on Making Impeachment Valid While Ignoring the Ever-Changing Storyline whistleblower Ukraine schiff polls Politics Media Impeachment of President Trump impeachment Government Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats Allow Media Exception adam schiff Abuse of Power 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

President Trump Was Right to Describe Nancy Pelosi’s Impeachment Charade as a Lynching

Westlake Legal Group media.townhall-2-2-620x317 President Trump Was Right to Describe Nancy Pelosi’s Impeachment Charade as a Lynching Politics Politico Media Justin Amash James Clyburn impeachment Herman Cain Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats Clarence Thomas Bobby Rush Allow Media Exception

 

One thing the left understands that we on the right can’t seem to get through our heads is that language has power and that words can mean just about whatever you want them to mean. Words, for the left, are not fixed in meaning, they are rather like enemy territory that you can capture and turn to whatever purpose you wish. It is a world foretold by Lewis Carroll’s Humpty Dumpty in Alice in Wonderland

“I don’t know what you mean by ‘glory,’ ” Alice said.
Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. “Of course you don’t—till I tell you. I meant ‘there’s a nice knock-down argument for you!’ ”
“But ‘glory’ doesn’t mean ‘a nice knock-down argument’,” Alice objected.
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.” [italics mine]
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that’s all.”

How else did we arrive a place where virulent pro-aborts, people who would allow a baby to be executed in the birth canal, are called pro-choice…as if the baby was given one? How else could we come to a situation where virtually any phrase from “states rights” to “voter ID” to “illegal alien” be imbued with racist overtones?

Josh Hawley ran afoul of that earlier today when he was slammed for making an anti-Semitic comment for calling a bloated, flaccid, lackwit at the Washington Post a “smug, rich liberal elitist” because, you know, only Jews can be “smug, rich liberal elitists,” like, for instance, Andrew Cuomo and his brother Fredo.

READ: Facts First: CNN Journalist Jake Tapper Insinuated Josh Hawley Is an Anti-Semite and It Did Not Go Well

President Trump also ran afoul of the leftwing Word Police today when talking about impeachment.

In the current environment where you can give offense by not using a standard pronoun and a set off a riot by pointing out that a person with whiskers and a dick is a man no matter what bicycle race they are competing in, the results were totally predictable

That morning post by the president tore open a fresh cycle of outrage on Capitol Hill — infuriating African-American legislators and further inflaming tensions in a Congress already deeply divided along party lines amid the Ukraine-focused investigation.

Story Continued Below
Trump has frequently parroted the phrase “witch hunt” and other politically explosive language to denigrate the work of former special counsel Robert Mueller and various oversight efforts scrutinizing his administration.

But the invocation of “lynching” to characterize a process explicitly sanctioned by the Constitution marked a new, racially insensitive show of malice by the president toward lawmakers’ drive to remove him from office.

“That is one word no president ought to imply on himself,” [House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.)]said. “I’ve studied presidential history quite a bit, and I don’t know if we’ve ever seen anything quite like this. Andrew Johnson never would’ve described what was happening to him this way, and certainly Bill Clinton didn’t, nor did Nixon. This president is hopefully an anomaly.”

Clyburn added: “I’m a product of the South. I know the history of that word. That is a word that we ought to be very, very careful about using.”

Stop right there, Scooter. While the left has culturally appropriated this word to apply to extajudicial violence directed against black Americans, the actual root of the word has zero to do with race. It comes from Virginia of the Revolutionary War. It is named for Charles Lynch and his method of suppressing Tories, that is, British sympathizers, in Virginia’s Shenandoah Valley. The name stuck and by 1850 “lynch” was a common term in both America and Britain (which had exceedingly few black residents and no slavery) for extrajudicial violence carried out under the aegis of the establish social order (differing from mob violence) as an adjunct to the normal legal system. Lynching was common in the Old West. In fact, one of the books high school students used to be forced to read, back before we started making the sex life of authors a primary concern in the inclusion of a book in the curriculum, was the Ox Bow Incident. It’s central focus is a lynching. Italians, Germans, Mexicans, Finns, Chinese and Japanese have all been lynched. Farmers have been lynched. Lynching is not something that is unique to American blacks, rather it is something that they have in common with virtually every other racial, political, or ethnic group in this country that has been out of favor. This is not to downplay racial lynchings that took place until what seems to be the last instance in 1964 (no, I don’t include James Byrd and other notorious white-on-black race-based killings as lynchings because the hallmark of a lynching is the perpetrators acting with the acquiescence and support of local authorities), but no one owns this word and no one gets to decide who uses it or what it means other than what it actually means.

The use of the word to describe a quasi legal process gone wrong is not uncommon:

Herman Cain used it:

Even CNN used it to defend Hillary Clinton:

 

And the analogy was used to defend Bill Clinton during the vote to impeach him:

Westlake Legal Group bill-clinton-impeachment-lynching-620x763 President Trump Was Right to Describe Nancy Pelosi’s Impeachment Charade as a Lynching Politics Politico Media Justin Amash James Clyburn impeachment Herman Cain Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats Clarence Thomas Bobby Rush Allow Media Exception

 

Here is Politco’s gotcha squad in action, asking GOP senators about the use of the word.

And you get this kind of rambling, incoherence from a guy trying desperately to miss the point

The outrage here, by the way, is contrived. This is the standard leftist tactic of finding some imaginary offense in anything said in order to try to silence the opposition.

The process that is being used to impeach President Trump is unlike anything the nation has experience in any of the other uses of the process against any official, elected or appointed. The target has no representation before the committee. Minority members are denied access to documents, transcripts, and depositions. The man leading the effort has made no secret that he will do whatever it takes to effect the impeachment of the president. To call this process grotesque is to be charitable. This proceeding would make a kangaroo court, a star chamber, or a judicial proceeding in front of Roland Freisler look just and unbiased by comparison.

President Trump had every right to use the word. It describes very accurately the process going on in the House. While impeachment is a political process, there has historically been an agreement that it should be conducted according to the basic rules of our legal system and that it should be fair. What Schiff and his fellatistos are doing is exactly what President Trump says, they are setting a precedent for the use of impeachment, without even a vaguest cause, by the majority party as a way of harassing if not outright removing a president of the opposing party. Lynching is a perfect metaphor. If you don’t like. Tough. That’s your problem and not anyone else’s.

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

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

The post President Trump Was Right to Describe Nancy Pelosi’s Impeachment Charade as a Lynching appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group media.townhall-2-2-300x153 President Trump Was Right to Describe Nancy Pelosi’s Impeachment Charade as a Lynching Politics Politico Media Justin Amash James Clyburn impeachment Herman Cain Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats Clarence Thomas Bobby Rush Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Mainstream Press Finally Catches On Barr Is Looking At Brennan And They Are Confused

Westlake Legal Group bill-barr-620x317 Mainstream Press Finally Catches On Barr Is Looking At Brennan And They Are Confused Uncategorized Front Page Stories Featured Story

U.S. Attorney General William Barr listens to concerns raised about public safety in rural Alaska during at a roundtable discussion at the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium on Wednesday, May 29, 2019, in Anchorage, Alaska. Barr did not take questions from reporters in his first public appearance after former special prosecutor Robert Mueller spoke to reporters after resigning at the completion of his report into Russian interference into the 2016 election. (AP Photo/Mark Thiessen)

Close observers of the “investigation into the investigators” will have already picked up on the fact that Attorney General William Barr and his appointed attorney from Connecticut John Durham were honing in on the intelligence community and their use of foreign assets in the Russia collusion probe, and now appear to be zeroing in on former CIA Director John Brennan.

But someone apparently forgot to inform the press.

As Barr and Durham get closer to completing their work, mainstream press has begun to write of the “mysterious” investigation and speculating whether or not it might be a criminal one. Again, close observers (which one would think might include the press) will have already worked that out since the presence of Durham — who can recommend indictments whereas Inspector General Michael Horowitz cannot — almost assuredly points to an investigation of potential crimes.

NBC was absolutely floored by this possibility last week when they tried diligently to get the DOJ to confirm that the probe is a criminal one.

With Barr’s approval, Durham has expanded his staff and the timeframe under scrutiny, according to a law enforcement official directly familiar with the matter. And he is now looking into conduct past Donald Trump’s inauguration in January 2017, a Trump administration official said.

Although the probe did not begin as a criminal investigation, Justice Department officials won’t comment on whether it has morphed into one.

If Durham is conducting a criminal investigation, it’s not clear what allegations of wrongdoing are being examined. The Justice Department has not detailed any, and a spokeswoman declined to comment for this story.

“I don’t know what the legal basis for this is,” Brennan said, calling the probe “bizarre.”

Cut to Tuesday morning, and that confusion has turned to snarky righteous indignation as outlets such as Politico begin to allude to the investigation’s focus on Brennan as President Trump’s “obsession” with the former CIA head.

As part of that investigation, Barr and John Durham, the federal prosecutor he appointed to conduct it, have been probing a conspiracy theory for which there is little if any evidence, according to several people with knowledge of the matter: that a key player in the Russia probe, a professor named Joseph Mifsud, was actually a Western intelligence asset sent to discredit the Trump campaign — and that the CIA, under Brennan, was somehow involved.

Trump, meanwhile, has become “obsessed” with Brennan, who frequently gets under the president’s skin by publicly questioning his mental acuity and fitness for office, according to a former White House official. On Brennan, “it was always, ‘he’s an idiot, he’s a crook, we ought to investigate him,’” this person said, characterizing Trump’s outbursts.

Since the beginning of his presidency, Trump has also repeatedly attacked Brennan publicly, tweeting about the former CIA director more than two dozen times. He’s questioned Brennan’s mental acuity and called him a liar, a leaker and blamed him for having “detailed knowledge of the (phony) Dossier,” a reference to the raw intelligence reports on Trump’s alleged Russia ties by British former MI-6 officer Christopher Steele. He also tried to unilaterally strip Brennan of his security clearance—a process the White House reportedly never went through with — and urged the House to call him in for questioning.

Politico even suggested that the focus on Brennan was somehow an offshoot of the Trump administration’s “blurring” of the lines between politics and law enforcement.

Sources within the FBI that Politico cited have begun priming the snark pump for when it’s discovered they did something wrong, sure; but nothing really wrong. Those officials also resorted to outright mocking of the probe.

“Is the IG report going to say we made mistakes? Yes,” said one of the former officials. “But it won’t say we did so for some nefarious purpose. So the report will be a dry hole for Trump and his supporters. Which is why [Barr and Durham] have now gone to this other theory, positing that the CIA was engaged in some rogue operation to overthrow Trump and therefore feeding the FBI bullshit,” he said. “It’s complete nonsense.”

“Haven’t you heard?” said another former FBI official, sarcastically. “Brennan was a puppet-master and we were just his puppets.”

All of this casual dismissal and press covering of behinds makes things fairly clear: Barr and Durham are on the right track.

My, how things have changed from the days of “All The President’s Men”.

The post Mainstream Press Finally Catches On Barr Is Looking At Brennan And They Are Confused appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group brennan-scowling-300x153 Mainstream Press Finally Catches On Barr Is Looking At Brennan And They Are Confused Uncategorized Front Page Stories Featured Story   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Facts First: CNN’s Jake Tapper Dishonestly Insinuated Josh Hawley Is an Anti-Semite and It Did Not Go Well

Westlake Legal Group JoshHawleyAPimage-1-620x317 Facts First: CNN’s Jake Tapper Dishonestly Insinuated Josh Hawley Is an Anti-Semite and It Did Not Go Well twitter Social Media republicans Politics North Carolina Missouri Media journalism Josh Hawley Jake Tapper Greg Sargent Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post Culture CNN anti-semitism Allow Media Exception

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., arrives for a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, Jan. 15, 2019, for Attorney General nominee William Barr. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

On Monday, Kira Davis wrote about an appallingly snobbish opinion piece written by former USDA research economist Andrew Crane-Droesch criticizing what he says is the Trump administration’s poor treatment of the agency and their decision to move it to Missouri.

In the article, which was published by the Washington Post, Crane-Droesch stated, without evidence, that the department “didn’t need to sit next to a corn field to analyze agricultural policy, and [agriculture secretary Sonny Perdue] knew that.”

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) blasted the piece in a tweet, saying “surely nobody could be that condescending & elitist” to think working in Missouri should be considered “punishment”:

This legitimate criticism started a bizarre series of tweets that ended up with CNN anchor/journalist Jake Tapper insinuating that Hawley was … an anti-Semite. Here’s how it got started:

Greg Sargent, a longtime blogger who writes for the liberal Plum Line page at the Washington Post, chimed in and snidely responded to Hawley’s tweet about Crane-Droesch’s piece by attacking the person instead of the substance of his argument:

Hawley clapped back, continuing to hammer home the point about liberal elitism, and noting that Sargent basically was proving his point:

Sargent was so fauxfended by Hawley’s remarks to him that he wrote a post at the WaPo explaining how he was right and the Senator was wrong.

Tapper retweeted the piece, and for some reason thought he’d be performing a public service by adding that Sargent was Jewish – which apparently no one knew but him (not even Sargent noted it in his piece):

Hawley did not let up in the face of the smear attempt:

Tapper actually thought he was helping himself in a follow-up tweet responding to Hawley, but all he did was insult the intelligence of everyone reading him who knew exactly what he was hinting at with his original tweet:

Twitter users, including some who are Jewish, ripped Tapper for making the insinuation Hawley was an anti-Semite:

I should note for the record that one thing Tapper conveniently left out of his tweet about Sargent is that Sargent is actually a liberal opinion writer, not a “journalist” in the sense that Tapper is. Tapper would have you think Hawley was just another Republican attacking a supposedly objective member of the mainstream media for writing something he didn’t like.

Sargent is technically a “journalist” only in the sense that he does original reporting here and there. That’s why the Washington Post lists him as an “opinion writer” instead of a journalist.

Tapper would never refer to a conservative writer as a “journalist” – he’d label them a conservative opinion writer to clue people in on their angle. That he simply referred to Sargent as a “journalist” without noting he was someone who was liberally biased and who typically attacks politicians from that angle was also dishonest by omission.

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

The post Facts First: CNN’s Jake Tapper Dishonestly Insinuated Josh Hawley Is an Anti-Semite and It Did Not Go Well appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group JoshHawleyAPimage-1-300x153 Facts First: CNN’s Jake Tapper Dishonestly Insinuated Josh Hawley Is an Anti-Semite and It Did Not Go Well twitter Social Media republicans Politics North Carolina Missouri Media journalism Josh Hawley Jake Tapper Greg Sargent Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post Culture CNN anti-semitism Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

The Tomahawks Come Out for Elizabeth Warren From Other Democrats on Health Care

Westlake Legal Group 31-elizabeth-warren.w529.h352.2x-300x200 The Tomahawks Come Out for Elizabeth Warren From Other Democrats on Health Care white house washington D.C. warren Social Media progressives Popular Culture Mitt Romney Michael Bennet Massachusetts Liberal Elitism Hollywood healthcare Health Care Government Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats Constitution Conservatives Congress communism Colorado Capitalism biden Bernie Sanders Barack Obama Allow Media Exception 2019

Senator Elizabeth Warren

The faux Indian references never get old.

Yesterday, I wrote about how Sen. Elizabeth Warren FINALLY has gotten around to talking about actually releasing a plan on Medicare for all. READ: FINALLY: Elizabeth Warren Will Unveil Her Medicare For All Plan. We Still Go Broke With It. This plan is full of crap that she can’t actually do. Simply because the system is already broke and taxing all the wealth in the country won’t fix that.

One of her colleagues in the race for the Democratic nomination in 2020 has taken notice and has decided to call her out.

According to Fox News

2020 presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., is being dishonest about her health care plan, which would add trillions to the deficit and raise taxes on all Americans, so she can use it as a soundbite, said Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo, on Monday.

“I think she’s not being honest about her plan,” Bennet said on “CNN Newsroom.” “I think her plan, which costs $33 trillion, is the equivalent of 70 percent of all the taxes that the federal government will collect over the next 10 years.

“I mean, it is a massive increase in taxes to this country and it hasn’t been explained to the American people,” he continued.

“It’s a soundbite. And more than that… it’s not based on common sense.”

What tipped you off, Senator, that her lips were moving?

Bennet has actually praised Bernie Sanders on his plan for at least being honest about how he is going to tax people for the luxury of free healthcare. Sanders is going to tax everyone and says it. Elizabeth’s plan, much like Obamacare was, is built upon a premise of “I won’t be around when the crap hits the fan so you guys figure it out.”

As we come up to the 100-day mark before the Iowa caucuses we are going to see that those who are on the bubble or are ticked off that they have not taken off in the polls start taking scalps of the frontrunner. (I CAN’T STOP.)

Warren has a very strained relationship with the truth and it is no surprise that she would put out a plan that other semi-reasonable people would immediately destroy. The last debate showed that when everyone took a shot at her they were letting her know she was full of buffalo chips. Going forward this pounding is only going to get worse.

Elizabeth should just go full Bernie and decide to be absolutely honest and say if you want mediocre health care for all then we have to tax you more than you have ever been taxed before. This is what you want, lemmings, so shut your pie holes and obey.

Maybe then her Senate colleagues also running for President would offer her praise instead of scorn.

Check out my other posts here on Red State and my podcast Bourbon On The Rocks plus like Bourbon On The Rocks on Facebook and follow me on the twitters at IRISHDUKE2 

The post The Tomahawks Come Out for Elizabeth Warren From Other Democrats on Health Care appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group 31-elizabeth-warren.w529.h352.2x-300x200 The Tomahawks Come Out for Elizabeth Warren From Other Democrats on Health Care white house washington D.C. warren Social Media progressives Popular Culture Mitt Romney Michael Bennet Massachusetts Liberal Elitism Hollywood healthcare Health Care Government Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats Constitution Conservatives Congress communism Colorado Capitalism biden Bernie Sanders Barack Obama Allow Media Exception 2019   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Joe Scarborough Tells the Funniest Joke Trump Supporters Have Heard in a Long Time

Westlake Legal Group MikaJoeImpeachment-620x346 Joe Scarborough Tells the Funniest Joke Trump Supporters Have Heard in a Long Time republicans Politics MSNBC Morning Joe Joe Scarborough impeachment Front Page Stories donald trump Allow Media Exception

Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough. Screen grab via MSNBC and MRC-TV.

Joe Scarborough of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” has an amazingly out-there idea that all those supporters of President Donald Trump are actually fully in support of seeing him impeached.

According to Scarborough, the majority of Trump’s base wants him impeached, and he knows that because, during the 2016 elections, many were secretly supporting Trump while saying they weren’t.

“And just like people used to be ashamed to admit they support Donald Trump. In fact, nobody would admit to us whenever we went around and gave talks,” said Scarborough. “Nobody would admit that they were voting for Donald Trump. And at one point I just started saying you’re all lying, because you’re all voting for him, stop lying and they’d laugh and go, yeah, we are.”

“Well, now as Donald Trump exits stage left, I suspect that we will see the same thing that people will be reluctant to admit publicly that they can’t put up with him anymore,” he continued.

Scarborough told a story of a man who chose Trump due to being given the option between him and Democrats like Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren. The man could only choose Trump in that case, but would rather have Pence in the White House. According to Scarborough, everybody is this man he spoke to.

“So, it may say 92% there supporting Donald Trump and not wanting the impeachment inquiry. But, Mika, it’s actually the fear and loathing is rising. And that is something that Republican members of the Hill are picking up on,” said Scarborough.

That’s a bold claim to make. In fact, it’s so bold that it comes off as fanciful. It strikes me more as wishful thinking than actual analysis.

It’s also a foolish take when you consider a few things. For one, Trump’s fundraising is record-breaking. People are shoveling cash his way faster than any other president in his position. So much so that it’s actually demoralizing the Democrats into infighting.

(READ: Trump Smashes Through A Fundraising Record And It Has Democrats Worried)

Also, it’s hard to come to the conclusion that Trump supporters secretly want him gone when he’s filling out stadiums filled to overflow with rabid fans all wearing MAGA hats and pro-Trump t-shirts.

The truth is, Democrats probably don’t have much left to give them hope against the Trump administration, be it superfluous investigations or the 2020 elections.

Perhaps that’s why Democrats are now embracing pure fantasy as an escape from the reality that it’s over for them, and has been since 2016.

 

The post Joe Scarborough Tells the Funniest Joke Trump Supporters Have Heard in a Long Time appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group MikaJoeImpeachment-300x167 Joe Scarborough Tells the Funniest Joke Trump Supporters Have Heard in a Long Time republicans Politics MSNBC Morning Joe Joe Scarborough impeachment Front Page Stories donald trump Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com