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 92)

#BelieveWomen: Juanita Broaddrick Has Questions for Omar and Warren After They Tweet Support for Blasey Ford

Westlake Legal Group Juanita-Broaddrick-bill-620x324 #BelieveWomen: Juanita Broaddrick Has Questions for Omar and Warren After They Tweet Support for Blasey Ford Social Media Sexual Assault Politics North Carolina Minnesota Media Massachusetts juanita broaddrick Impeachment of President Trump impeachment Ilhan Omar Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Front Page Feminism Featured Story Featured Post Elizabeth Warren donald trump democrats Culture crime Congress Campaigns Brett Kavanaugh Bill Clinton Allow Media Exception #BelieveAllWomen

Because it’s been a year since Christine Blasey Ford testified in the show trial witch hunt Supreme Court confirmation hearing for Brett Kavanaugh, a number of elected Democrats are taking to the Twitter machine to note they “still believe her.”

Among them is Sen. Kamala Harris (CA), who stated Ford “courageously forced our nation to reckon with an issue that has too often been kept in the dark.” And because she’s desperately trying to become relevant again in the 2020 presidential race, Harris has called for an impeachment inquiry into Justice Kavanaugh.

Two other high-profile Democrats women who tweeted out their support for Blasey Ford were fellow presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren (MA) and Squad member Rep. Ilhan Omar (MN).

Here’s what Omar had to say about Blasey Ford:

Like Harris, Warren feels Kavanaugh and President Trump both should be impeached. Warren tweeted her support Friday night for Blasey Ford:

Juanita Broaddrick, who has said for decades that former President Bill Clinton raped her in the late 70s when he was the Arkansas attorney general, had some questions for the both of them:

When Omar didn’t respond, Broaddrick also asked the same question of Warren:

As of this writing, neither of them have responded to Broaddrick’s question. And they won’t.

Because for Democrats, especially Democratic women, “Believe All Women” – which ironically is a slogan that gained popularity after tweets from Hillary Clinton with similar messaging went viral a few years ago – “Believe All Women” only applies to women who have accused Republican/conservative men of sexual misconduct or assault.

In other words, “Believe All Women” is a weaponized accusatory tool for Democratic women which they shamefully use only in instances where they feel it will benefit them politically. It’s shameful, but it’s who they are.

Kudos to Broaddrick for continuing to point out their double standards.

Related –>> Hillary Clinton Tries To Bask In Impeachment Glow, But Juanita Broaddrick Is Simply Not Having It

—–
— 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 #BelieveWomen: Juanita Broaddrick Has Questions for Omar and Warren After They Tweet Support for Blasey Ford appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group Juanita-Broaddrick-bill-300x157 #BelieveWomen: Juanita Broaddrick Has Questions for Omar and Warren After They Tweet Support for Blasey Ford Social Media Sexual Assault Politics North Carolina Minnesota Media Massachusetts juanita broaddrick Impeachment of President Trump impeachment Ilhan Omar Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Front Page Feminism Featured Story Featured Post Elizabeth Warren donald trump democrats Culture crime Congress Campaigns Brett Kavanaugh Bill Clinton Allow Media Exception #BelieveAllWomen   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Polling Indicates That the Democrat Focus On Impeachment Isn’t a Great Evolutionary Strategy

Westlake Legal Group bigfoot-542546_1280-620x413 Polling Indicates That the Democrat Focus On Impeachment Isn’t a Great Evolutionary Strategy youGovUS/HuffPo polls Politics Morning Consult/Politico Marist/NPR impeachment Harris/Rasmussen Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats Allow Media Exception

 

The Democrats seem committed to impeaching President Trump. At some level they’ve decided that impeachment will help them in 2020. I suspect part of this dynamic is driven by the fact that the Democrats only control the House and most of the federal bureaucracy and so they know that their chance of passing any significant legislation to mobilize their base approaches zero and one way of diverting attention from the lunacy of about a third of Democrat House members is by peddling the narrative that “we were obstructed by an illegitimate president and we impeached him.”

Let’s take a look at some of the polling:

Because we don’t do this kind of thing very often, it is more than a little uncertain what all this means. National Review, frames it this way: Plurality of Americans Support Impeaching Trump. You can nearly imagine David French and a couple of others forming an impromptu conga line replete with fruity drinks in coconut shells with festive paper umbrellas.

To me there are several interesting points.

Trump retains about 90% support from Republicans. That indicates that the bullsh** Jeff Flake was slinging was just that, bullsh**.

If 90% of GOP voters oppose impeachment there is no possible universe win which over half the GOP Senate caucus would vote to convict President Trump.

Independents are evenly divided on the subject.

We really don’t know the intensity of the independents but there are some factoids in the NRO article that bear considering:

A Marist/NPR/PBS NewsHour survey, meanwhile, taken on Wednesday, found that nearly half of Americans support impeachment. Forty-nine percent of respondents said they favor impeaching Trump, while 46 percent said they oppose it. Half of respondents said they think the inquiry is a “serious matter,” while 48 percent said it’s “just politics.”The survey also found that half of independents disapprove of House Democrats’ impeachment inquiry, and 52 percent said it isn’t worth the time if the Senate ultimately fails to convict Trump.

This does not sound intense at all.

This from the Morning Consult/Politico poll:

Fifty-nine percent of voters who support impeachment said they believe the president committed an impeachable offense, a high since the survey began asking the question in May 2017. Thirty-seven percent of impeachment supporters, meanwhile, said they believe Trump should be removed from office.

Conversely, 41% of people who support impeachment DON’T believe Trump committed any offenses and 63% don’t want Trump removed from office.

This sounds like the see impeachment as a shot across the bow but really don’t want Trump convicted by the Senate

My assessment would be that the polling for impeachment has peaked. The more the nation hears about how Schiff (and I think a number of people within the IC) engineered this scandal the less they will like it. Unlike the situation during the Russia Hoax, most of the levers of power a firmly in Trump’s hands and that is going to have an impact going forward. If the Democrats do push ahead with impeachment, that is what the 2020 election will be fought on nationally and in House and Senate elections. If your highwater mark is around 45%, that isn’t a great strategy.

On the other hand, the Democrats can’t really afford to bail on impeachment. They need the motivated loonies to turn out and if they don’t impeach OrangeMan, many of those loonies are going to be torqued and stay home. Conservatives, you know how that works. Look what happens every time we primary some GOPe type and win…they stay home.

One thing we know for sure from the past three years is that you can never predict what President Trump will do. But I think the takeaways from this polling is clear. Absent some new and substantial scandal, the desire for impeachment has peaked and will begin to recede. And it is the Democrats who have to decide if impeachment works for them as a reelection platform in that tranche of red/purple districts that flipped in 2018…or if they even care.

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

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

The post Polling Indicates That the Democrat Focus On Impeachment Isn’t a Great Evolutionary Strategy appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group bigfoot-542546_1280-300x200 Polling Indicates That the Democrat Focus On Impeachment Isn’t a Great Evolutionary Strategy youGovUS/HuffPo polls Politics Morning Consult/Politico Marist/NPR impeachment Harris/Rasmussen Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Trump Tells Iran to Go Pound Sand

Westlake Legal Group irgc-speed-boat-620x317 Trump Tells Iran to Go Pound Sand United Nations UN Saudi Arabia Sanctions rouhani Pound Sand Politics Oil Prices Lifted Iran Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story False donald trump Collapsing

FILE – In this July 2, 2012 file photo, an Iranian Revolutionary Guard speedboat escorts a passenger ship, near the spot where an Iranian airliner was shot down by a U.S. warship 24 years ago killing 290 passengers in Persian Gulf. While U.S. President Donald Trump angered Iran with his speech on refusing to re-certify the nuclear deal, Tehran won’t walk away from it in retaliation. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi, File)

Although the latest ginned up scandal involving Trump has dominated the news the past week, there’s been other, far more important things going on. One of those things was Iran offering to make concessions in response to lifting sanctions.

At the time I wrote this.

As to how President Trump should respond to this? My opinion is he should laugh in their face. They had their chance to negotiate and save their regime. Let them collapse. It’s not like they can be trusted to hold to any new re-writing of the nuclear deal anyway.

Hilariously, Iran’s garbage regime went to the UN and claimed that the United States had agreed to lift all sanctions just for the opportunity to talk to the Mullahs. That was laughable on its face. Here’s the report on that.

I doubt Trump is reading RedState, but it appears we managed to arrive at the same conclusion, as the President is essentially telling Iran to go take a long walk off a short pier.

So what’s really going on here? Iran is burning. Their economy is collapsing, they have no moves left to make militarily without provoking a war, and their own people are turning against them. Unlike Barack Obama, who sought to prop up this dumpster fire just so he could claim a domestic political victory, Trump has been playing hardball and it’s working.

Iran won’t even have the resources to produce a nuclear weapon if this keeps up and there’s no end in sight for them. Meanwhile, we’ve committed troops to help protect the oil production going on in Saudi Arabia, which only further smothers Iran’s ability to create havoc and drive up the cost of oil.

Iran had grown accustom to being able to rattle their saber and get their way under the Obama administration. Times have changed and it’s left them flailing and lying at the UN in order to try to garner some credibility back with their people. It’s not going to work. No re-upping of the nuclear deal should be on the table. Let these guys burn.

————————————————

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 Trump Tells Iran to Go Pound Sand appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group a8636803-f428-4e76-ab5b-b516cf1d9e5e-300x153 Trump Tells Iran to Go Pound Sand United Nations UN Saudi Arabia Sanctions rouhani Pound Sand Politics Oil Prices Lifted Iran Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story False donald trump Collapsing   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

No Sh**, No Lies Tales From The Infantry. Volume V

Westlake Legal Group armadillo-620x417 No Sh**, No Lies Tales From The Infantry. Volume V tales of the infantry Miscellania haute cuisine Front Page Stories Featured Story eglin afb armadillo Allow Media Exception

Armadillo by Vince Smith, licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0/Original

We’ve had quite an exciting week here at RedState and it doesn’t show much sign of slowing down. On the site side, we added two new contributors. In the news, it looks like Adam Schiff and his staff were intimately involved in crafting the so-called whistleblower complaint, the IC IG seems to have altered rules to permit the complainant to claim whistleblower status, and even though the Democrats are going whole hog on impeachment the entire mess is (at least to me) the mother of all nothingburgers.

Hog? Burger? That reminds me of a story in a roundabout sorta way. It must be time to get us back on track with Tales of the Infantry.

As I’ve said, back when I was 28 years old, weighed 155 pounds, had a full head of hair and thought beer was food I was anointed by the Almighty to command an infantry company (well, maybe not the Almighty but a two-star and division commander and from an infantry captain’s perspective that was getting damned close to the Divine). Actually two companies. I commanded a Combat Support Company and then when our battalion was transitioned to Light Infantry, my company was disbanded and I was given command of rifle company. This is from that first command.

I’d been in command for just a few weeks when we deployed to Eglin AFB, FL, to participate in a multi-divisional exercise called Bold Eagle. We were wargaming how a regular, foot-mobile infantry division could defend against a mechanized or armored division. The short answer is “not very well.” Anytime anyone starts woofing “smaller and more mobile” as an answer to any military equipment issue I really want to put them in an M151 gun jeep and let them be chased by an M60 tank. You in the jeep, choose your terrain…not that it makes any difference. There is sort of primordial fear in navigating through a pine barren, dodging trees and being able to look behind you and seeing the trees you dodged being knocked down. I imagine that reaction or tightness in the sphincter and the gonads seeking refuge between the liver and pancreas was imprinting on us by some Cro-Magnon m-fer who’d been chased by a mastadon.

But being chased by tanks is not what this is about.

The Chinese have a delightful saying, 背脊向天人所食」or “if something’s back is facing the sky, it is for people to eat.” (Y’all didn’t know I was fluent in Chinese did you? Well, I’m not.) But there is also something to be said about a bunch of infantrymen who are bored.

The things I remember most about Eglin are the smell on pines, not the air freshener scent but that heavy pine-rosin-in-90-degree-heat-and-100-percent-humidity smell, the sand roads, and the armadillos.

I’d never in my life seen one of those things before and neither had most of my troops so they were something of a mystery to us. There were the usual stories about them carrying leprosy but we didn’t see any of them with their noses falling off or ringing little bells and chanting “Unclean! Unclean!” so we wrote it off to the usual alarmist bullsh** that only medical personnel and intelligence weenies will spread. We started wondering what one would taste like…barbecued.

One day, on a recon, I was trundling down a really rough sand road than continually challenged the drive train of the jeep along with my 19-year-old driver. Not twenty yards from us an armadillo poked his face out of the brush and waddled across the road. It was a magical moment when the minds of the jeep driver and the company commander were as one.

Something you have to understand about small unit leadership is that where civilians often see nicely uniformed rows of troops and a strict hierarchy, it is really a lot more nebulous. You rule by personality as much as by rank. It’s like a football team where you’re not only the quarterback but you spend some time as cheerleader (in today’s military, this could involve wearing a revealing miniskirt and makeup, NTTAWWT) and team mascot. The corollary to that is that two men will do stupid sh** that would never occur to one man to do and in an infantry company where being 30 makes you a graybeard, there isn’t a lot of commonsense to spread about in the first place.

My driver looked at me just as I looked at him. He killed the engine and before it had come to a complete halt we had un-assed the vehicle and were “sprinting” through powder-like sand that was over ankle deep towards Mr. Armadillo. The beast looked at us and froze. I don’t think he’d ever seen anything like that before. Then he realized we weren’t out for a Sunday stroll and picked up a double time. We closed in on him. He sprinted in his Hillary-Clinton waddling kind of way. We pursued. Every time we gained on him, we’d glance at each other, and double over laughing.

In the pine barrens we had an advantage. There was a lot of deadfall that the armadillo had to spend time negotiating and we just hurdled it. Once we got off the sand road we found our speed compared favorably with that of the armadillo and we were more mobile. And we had more endurance. Eventually he figured out that we weren’t going away and did his roll up in a ball thing, which didn’t work out well for him.

We returned to camp in triumph. A fire was prepared. And we had a cook out. It was the nastiest tasting crap I’ve ever eaten in my life outside of something that didn’t have kale or quinoa added.

But the story doesn’t completely end there. One of my troops cleaned out the shell…mostly… and crammed it down over his helmet (we were wearing the steel pots, not the kevlar or “Fritz” helmet). He looked like he was an extra who’d just wandered off the set of Conan the Barbarian.

The post No Sh**, No Lies Tales From The Infantry. Volume V appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group armadillo-300x202 No Sh**, No Lies Tales From The Infantry. Volume V tales of the infantry Miscellania haute cuisine Front Page Stories Featured Story eglin afb armadillo Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Nancy Pelosi’s December 2018 Rule Changes Block Republicans From Participating In Impeachment Process

Westlake Legal Group 3d07ac94-617f-4195-9a13-c130cea3e6b1-620x317 Nancy Pelosi’s December 2018 Rule Changes Block Republicans From Participating In Impeachment Process President Trump Nancy Pelosi Mainstream Media Liberal Elitism Impeachment of President Trump Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats Conservative Tree House's Sundance Congress Changes to House Rules biden Allow Media Exception 2020

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of Calif., pauses as she speaks during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Jan. 17, 2019. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)

 

In December 2018, the soon-to-be Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, was busy making changes in the House rules for the incoming 116th Congress. She was actually setting the stage for her anticipated impeachment of President Trump. At the time, The Conservative Treehouse’s “Sundance” wrote, “Remember when we warned [November 8th, 2018] that a convergence of left-wing groups, activists, DNC donors and specifically the Lawfare team, would align with (and meet) incoming Democrat leadership to construct a road-map for the “resistance” priorities? Well, exactly that planned and coordinated outcome is visible as incoming Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi presents her new rules for the 116th congress.”

(Note: Sundance points out the details of the relevant rules changes here.)

House Dems are currently using those new rules to subvert historic processes and prepare the articles of impeachment.

Although impeachment is rare, on the few occasions one has been initiated, a full house vote has always been taken. However, this is not mandatory. Pelosi has not held a full house vote and there’s a reason for that. A formal vote would give the minority enforceable rights. Without a full vote, the articles of impeachment “can be drawn up without any participation by the minority. This was always the plan that was visible in Pelosi’s changed House rules.”

Westlake Legal Group Screen-Shot-2019-09-29-at-7.53.22-AM-620x184 Nancy Pelosi’s December 2018 Rule Changes Block Republicans From Participating In Impeachment Process President Trump Nancy Pelosi Mainstream Media Liberal Elitism Impeachment of President Trump Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats Conservative Tree House's Sundance Congress Changes to House Rules biden Allow Media Exception 2020

Once the articles are drawn up and passed out of committee, they will come before a full house vote. “Once Pelosi achieves a vote of passage on any single article President Trump is considered impeached.” Pelosi has deliberately timed the whole sequence of events so that Democrats will have the current two-week recess to return to their districts to convince their constituents that impeachment is necessary. According to Sundance:

There are 31 House districts currently held by Democrats which President Trump won in 2016; Pelosi is giving those members an opportunity to make their impeachment case to their constituents now, but failure to support the effort is likely not optional for all except a few of the most tenuously vulnerable. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and Majority Whip James Clyburn will assemble enough votes for impeachment.

While those house members are explaining to their constituents, back in DC the committee work on the articles will collate. On Friday afternoon, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, Oversight Committee Chairman Elijah Cummings, and Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Eliot Engel, issued a subpoena demanding a slew of Ukraine-related documents from Secretary of State Mike Pompeo by Oct. 4th. The committees also scheduled depositions with five State Department officials between Oct. 2 and Oct. 10.

Notice that with the rule changes the minority will not be participating in these depositions. The republicans will likely have no idea what is happening therein.

Fox News’ Chad Pergram explains that “the subpoenas are part of a two-pronged strategy by Democrats. Get the information to help tailor the articles of impeachment, or convert a refusal to comply into an impeachment article itself.” Why does that not surprise us?

When Congress reconvenes, the Articles of Impeachment will be ready. Sundance says that for the sake of optics, Pelosi has to make it appear that Republicans played a role in the process. He writes:

She will likely have mid to late October destined for the committee chairs to have committee debate on their pre-assembled articles.

Democrats are keen optical strategists and narrative engineers; and as you know they coordinate all endeavors with their media allies. The narrative assembly and usefulness by media to drive a tactical national political message will hit heavily in this mid/late October time-frame. This will allow the executive suites (media) to capture/stir-up maximum public interest and make the most money therein.

Then, once Pelosi is certain the maximum political benefit has been achieved, she will announce the date for the Full House Vote on Articles of Impeachment. We can be certain the date will be filled with maximum drama and made-for-tv effect complete with Speaker Pelosi bringing back the big gavel for a grand presentation and a full house vote.

Pergram breaks down the math:

The current House breakdown is 235 Democrats, 199 Republicans, and one independent: Rep. Justin Amash, I-Mich. To pass anything in the House, 218 yeas are needed.

That means Democrats can only lose 17 votes from their side and still have enough to pass an article of impeachment. Amash has endorsed impeachment, so let’s say the magic number is actually 16. If the president is to be impeached, that means Democrats could have 15 of their own voting for articles of impeachment while representing a district which Trump carried in 2016.

A House floor vote to impeach the President is kind of like an indictment, codified in Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution. If the House votes to impeach, Article 1, Section 3 of the Constitution sends the article(s) to the Senate for a trial presided over by Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts.

Pelosi has been preparing for this since Election Day. Every detail was carefully planned, except for the crime. She had hoped Mueller would have provided one, but no worries, she found one.

However, she does face several headwinds. For one thing, whistleblower mania is folding faster than a house of cards.

Many of the whistleblower’s claims and the interpretations spun by the eager liberal commentators have been blown up.

First, we were told there were eight references to Biden during President Trump’s July 25th conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Turns out there were three. And they were all found in two sentences.

Next, the media breathlessly reported that a ‘promise’ had been made, there was a quid pro quo. There was no promise, no quid pro quo.

My colleague Nick Arama reported (here) two more whistleblower claims which have been debunked. The complaint said that Counselor to the State Department Ulrich Brechbuhl was on the Trump/Zelensky call. He was not.

The document also claimed that “by mid-May, U.S. diplomat Kurt Volker sought to “contain the damage” from Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani’s outreach to Ukraine.” Text messages from Volker to Giuliani have since shown that to be false. Even ABC News has acknowledged this. They reported, “The State Department has confirmed that Volker put Giuliani in touch with Zelensky adviser Andriy Yermak at Yermak’s request.”

Last night The Federalist’s Sean Davis reported that days before the whistleblower submitted his complaint, the intelligence community “secretly eliminated the requirement that whistleblower complaints contain only direct, first-hand knowledge of wrongdoing allegations.” This change allowed the whistleblower to file a complaint based on hearsay information.

Right about now, Republicans could use a nice, devastating Inspector General report showing FISA abuse by the FBI. It’s been two weeks since DOJ Inspector General submitted his report to the DOJ for classification. Hopefully, it will be released this week. President Trump, as well as the rest of us, need a win.

The post Nancy Pelosi’s December 2018 Rule Changes Block Republicans From Participating In Impeachment Process appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group rsz_f07c7864-5d7c-4b34-8895-98e1e607df21-300x200 Nancy Pelosi’s December 2018 Rule Changes Block Republicans From Participating In Impeachment Process President Trump Nancy Pelosi Mainstream Media Liberal Elitism Impeachment of President Trump Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats Conservative Tree House's Sundance Congress Changes to House Rules biden Allow Media Exception 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

The Buck Stops…With Buck

=========
=========
Promoted from the diaries by streiff. Promotion does not imply endorsement.
=========
=========

Ed Buck is a despicable man.  He is an avid LGBTQ to the infinity power activist and businessman originally from Arizona but now resides in West Hollywood, California.  This past Tuesday, he was arrested after another victim suffered a drug overdose in his home.  Thankfully, the person in question was rushed to the hospital and survived.  The same cannot be said for two other drug overdose victims who died in the very same house where the current victim managed to survive.

In July 2017, Gemmel Moore was found in Buck’s apartment dead from an apparent drug overdose.  Eighteen months later, Timothy Dean was found dead from a drug overdose in the same apartment from methamphetamine.  No charges were filed due to a lack of evidence despite the fact the apartment was littered with drug paraphernalia.  Hmmmm…

Buck is well-known in Democrat circles as a mega-donor.  The former male model has donated to the campaigns of Hillary Clinton.  The following is a list of his donations:

  • $2,000 to Jerry McNerney (D-CA)
  • $1,000 to Barney Frank (D-MA)
  • $1,000 to Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-CA)
  • $24,600 to Krystem Sinema (D-AZ)
  • $1,000 to Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-CA)
  • $1,000 to Jackie Rosen (D-NV)
  • $10.60000 to Ted Lieu (D-CA)
  • $5,400 to Adam Schiff (D-CA)
  • $,2700 to Hillary Clinton (D-???)

Besides these well-known names, he has donated to various losing candidates and local politicians in Hollywood as well as his PAC, “Getting Stuff Done.”  That PAC was likely first funded in an effort to get Sinema effectively elected to the Senate from Arizona.

According to the coroner’s report in the Moore death, in a notebook of the victim’s he noted that he used drugs with someone whose name was redacted in the report.  According to a civil suit filed by the mother of Moore, that name is none other than Ed Buck.  In the living room when the body was found, male pornography was playing on the television.  Investigators found various sex toys and methamphetamine in the living room of Buck.   However, LA county sheriffs found no indication of foul play and the death was ruled accidental.  The civil suit against Buck has been moved to federal court since Moore was from Texas and was allegedly lured to California by Buck

Timothy Dean was the next victim.  Buck told investigators that Dean was acting strange and that he tied a  noose around his neck and attempted to kill himself.  After Buck removed the noose, he did what any red-blooded Good Samaritan would do- he took a shower.  Upon returning to the living room, he found Dean dead and called the police.  He claimed they did not do drugs and did not have sex, although the death was ruled an accidental drug overdose of methamphetamine.

The latest victim managed to escape Buck’s apartment and called 9-1-1.  According to police reports, upon investigation, they found pictures of many men in various compromising sexual situations.

All three victims had one thing in common- they were black.  What is surprising about the case is that there is nary a word about the obvious perversion involved yet many articles in the Leftist press about gay black men being preyed upon.  For example, Rolling Stone ran this headline: “Ed Buck’s Arrest Has Stirred Up the Far-Right- But the Story is Even Bigger Than They Realize.”  The subtitle is: “Buck’s Arrest Points to a Bigger Systemic Failure in America.”   And what can that bigger “systemic failure” be?  You guessed it- the United States (the country, I tell you!) is failing to protect gay black men.

The problem of the Left is not the perverted lifestyle of some homosexuals (who happen to be major Democrat donors).  Once again, they have racialized the issue.  The problem is not that Ed Buck drugged and engaged in weird acts with homosexual victims.  The problem is that the three victims happened to be black.  One wonders what their reactions would be if the victims were white?    Perhaps if they were Latino, we would hear about white gay men preying upon vulnerable Hispanic gay men and, God forbid if they were “dreamers.”

This is not a racial story.  This is a story of perversion taken into a new stratosphere.  Simply, Ed Buck is a pervert who managed to get away with two murders.  He managed to get away with it because he was a donor to the Democrats.  One can rest assured that after the death of Gennel Moore in West Hollywood if Ed Buck were a Trump supporter, he would be pilloried long before now in the Leftist press.  He would be branded a brown-shirted Nazi and would become the face of the Trump supporter.

One can only hope that this piece of human scum suffers the maximum penalty and that Gennel Moore’s mother prevails in her civil lawsuit.  If he can donate $43,200 to the likes of people like Adam Schiff, Kyrsten Sinema, and Hillary Clinton, he surely can payout at least $100,000 to Moore’s mother.

May the piece of scum rot in hell.

The post The Buck Stops…With Buck appeared first on RedState.

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

Nancy Pelosi’s December 2018 Rule Changes Block Republicans From Participating In Impeachment Process

Westlake Legal Group 3d07ac94-617f-4195-9a13-c130cea3e6b1-620x317 Nancy Pelosi’s December 2018 Rule Changes Block Republicans From Participating In Impeachment Process President Trump Nancy Pelosi Mainstream Media Liberal Elitism Impeachment of President Trump Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats Conservative Tree House's Sundance Congress Changes to House Rules biden Allow Media Exception 2020

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of Calif., pauses as she speaks during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Jan. 17, 2019. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)

 

In December 2018, the soon-to-be Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, was busy making changes in the House rules for the incoming 116th Congress. She was actually setting the stage for her anticipated impeachment of President Trump. At the time, The Conservative Treehouse’s “Sundance” wrote, “Remember when we warned [November 8th, 2018] that a convergence of left-wing groups, activists, DNC donors and specifically the Lawfare team, would align with (and meet) incoming Democrat leadership to construct a road-map for the “resistance” priorities? Well, exactly that planned and coordinated outcome is visible as incoming Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi presents her new rules for the 116th congress.”

(Note: Sundance points out the details of the relevant rules changes here.)

House Dems are currently using those new rules to subvert historic processes and prepare the articles of impeachment.

Although impeachment is rare, on the few occasions one has been initiated, a full house vote has always been taken. However, this is not mandatory. Pelosi has not held a full house vote and there’s a reason for that. A formal vote would give the minority enforceable rights. Without a full vote, the articles of impeachment “can be drawn up without any participation by the minority. This was always the plan that was visible in Pelosi’s changed House rules.”

Westlake Legal Group Screen-Shot-2019-09-29-at-7.53.22-AM-620x184 Nancy Pelosi’s December 2018 Rule Changes Block Republicans From Participating In Impeachment Process President Trump Nancy Pelosi Mainstream Media Liberal Elitism Impeachment of President Trump Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats Conservative Tree House's Sundance Congress Changes to House Rules biden Allow Media Exception 2020

Once the articles are drawn up and passed out of committee, they will come before a full house vote. “Once Pelosi achieves a vote of passage on any single article President Trump is considered impeached.” Pelosi has deliberately timed the whole sequence of events so that Democrats will have the current two-week recess to return to their districts to convince their constituents that impeachment is necessary. According to Sundance:

There are 31 House districts currently held by Democrats which President Trump won in 2016; Pelosi is giving those members an opportunity to make their impeachment case to their constituents now, but failure to support the effort is likely not optional for all except a few of the most tenuously vulnerable. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and Majority Whip James Clyburn will assemble enough votes for impeachment.

While those house members are explaining to their constituents, back in DC the committee work on the articles will collate. On Friday afternoon, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, Oversight Committee Chairman Elijah Cummings, and Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Eliot Engel, issued a subpoena demanding a slew of Ukraine-related documents from Secretary of State Mike Pompeo by Oct. 4th. The committees also scheduled depositions with five State Department officials between Oct. 2 and Oct. 10.

Notice that with the rule changes the minority will not be participating in these depositions. The republicans will likely have no idea what is happening therein.

Fox News’ Chad Pergram explains that “the subpoenas are part of a two-pronged strategy by Democrats. Get the information to help tailor the articles of impeachment, or convert a refusal to comply into an impeachment article itself.” Why does that not surprise us?

When Congress reconvenes, the Articles of Impeachment will be ready. Sundance says that for the sake of optics, Pelosi has to make it appear that Republicans played a role in the process. He writes:

She will likely have mid to late October destined for the committee chairs to have committee debate on their pre-assembled articles.

Democrats are keen optical strategists and narrative engineers; and as you know they coordinate all endeavors with their media allies. The narrative assembly and usefulness by media to drive a tactical national political message will hit heavily in this mid/late October time-frame. This will allow the executive suites (media) to capture/stir-up maximum public interest and make the most money therein.

Then, once Pelosi is certain the maximum political benefit has been achieved, she will announce the date for the Full House Vote on Articles of Impeachment. We can be certain the date will be filled with maximum drama and made-for-tv effect complete with Speaker Pelosi bringing back the big gavel for a grand presentation and a full house vote.

Pergram breaks down the math:

The current House breakdown is 235 Democrats, 199 Republicans, and one independent: Rep. Justin Amash, I-Mich. To pass anything in the House, 218 yeas are needed.

That means Democrats can only lose 17 votes from their side and still have enough to pass an article of impeachment. Amash has endorsed impeachment, so let’s say the magic number is actually 16. If the president is to be impeached, that means Democrats could have 15 of their own voting for articles of impeachment while representing a district which Trump carried in 2016.

A House floor vote to impeach the President is kind of like an indictment, codified in Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution. If the House votes to impeach, Article 1, Section 3 of the Constitution sends the article(s) to the Senate for a trial presided over by Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts.

Pelosi has been preparing for this since Election Day. Every detail was carefully planned, except for the crime. She had hoped Mueller would have provided one, but no worries, she found one.

However, she does face several headwinds. For one thing, whistleblower mania is folding faster than a house of cards.

Many of the whistleblower’s claims and the interpretations spun by the eager liberal commentators have been blown up.

First, we were told there were eight references to Biden during President Trump’s July 25th conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Turns out there were three. And they were all found in two sentences.

Next, the media breathlessly reported that a ‘promise’ had been made, there was a quid pro quo. There was no promise, no quid pro quo.

My colleague Nick Arama reported (here) two more whistleblower claims which have been debunked. The complaint said that Counselor to the State Department Ulrich Brechbuhl was on the Trump/Zelensky call. He was not.

The document also claimed that “by mid-May, U.S. diplomat Kurt Volker sought to “contain the damage” from Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani’s outreach to Ukraine.” Text messages from Volker to Giuliani have since shown that to be false. Even ABC News has acknowledged this. They reported, “The State Department has confirmed that Volker put Giuliani in touch with Zelensky adviser Andriy Yermak at Yermak’s request.”

Last night The Federalist’s Sean Davis reported that days before the whistleblower submitted his complaint, the intelligence community “secretly eliminated the requirement that whistleblower complaints contain only direct, first-hand knowledge of wrongdoing allegations.” This change allowed the whistleblower to file a complaint based on hearsay information.

Right about now, Republicans could use a nice, devastating Inspector General report showing FISA abuse by the FBI. It’s been two weeks since DOJ Inspector General submitted his report to the DOJ for classification. Hopefully, it will be released this week. President Trump, as well as the rest of us, need a win.

The post Nancy Pelosi’s December 2018 Rule Changes Block Republicans From Participating In Impeachment Process appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group rsz_f07c7864-5d7c-4b34-8895-98e1e607df21-300x200 Nancy Pelosi’s December 2018 Rule Changes Block Republicans From Participating In Impeachment Process President Trump Nancy Pelosi Mainstream Media Liberal Elitism Impeachment of President Trump Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats Conservative Tree House's Sundance Congress Changes to House Rules biden Allow Media Exception 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Rush Limbaugh: America is in the Middle of a ‘Cold Civil War’

Westlake Legal Group civil-war-fighting-SCREENSHOT-620x333 Rush Limbaugh: America is in the Middle of a ‘Cold Civil War’ william barr Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky Rush Limbaugh Rudy Giuliani progressives President Trump Nancy Pelosi Mueller Investigation Joe Biden Impeachment of President Trump hunter biden Front Page Stories Featured Story fake news eric swalwell corruption Congress collusion cia Allow Media Exception Abuse of Power 2020

 

What does a country do when an entire political party refuses to accept the results of a fair presidential election? Since before President Trump was elected, the Democrats decided to cultivate an alternative set of facts intended to frame him for a crime(s) he did not commit. They have sustained this false narrative on a daily basis for over three years, all the while aided and abetted by a compliant media.

Their hatred of Donald Trump and everything he stands for goes without saying. But that’s no longer their only problem. Their immense campaign to first undermine his campaign and their efforts to force him from office have left behind a trail of evidence. Countless government officials and bureaucrats have acted unethically, illegally or both. So, the invention of one crisis after another has become a desperate bid to avoid exposure and possible prosecution. With the IG report due any day now, and the knowledge that prosecutor John Durham’s team has been working hard since the spring to dig up how it all started, they’re in panic mode.

On his radio show last week, Rush Limbaugh made the case that, although no shots have been fired, America is in the midst of a Cold Civil War. Limbaugh told his listeners:

It’s about making sure the American people do not learn the extent of the corruption in the Obama administration and the Democratic Party at large, and particularly among these people in the deep state who did what they did to deny Trump his election victory.

And that’s why Pelosi’s out there today saying that Bill Barr has gone rogue. If you need any evidence that they’re scared to death of what Barr and his team are investigating as to the origins of all of this, Pelosi out of the blue saying that Barr has gone rogue, they are doing everything they can to destroy everybody on the other side of this.

It encompasses overturning the election results of 2016, it is also about protecting and defending the deep state, the Washington establishment going forward. Their careers, their fortunes, their corruption. There are terribly big stakes involved here for these people. And Trump is on the cusp of overturning it and exposing it. They cannot allow that to happen.

The whistleblower complaint is the latest stage of the war. Limbaugh correctly notes that it is manufactured political opposition research, just as Christopher Steele’s dossier was. And the entire Democratic Party, including the media, is acting as if it’s real.

Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) appeared on Fox on Friday morning and said, “Well, the president’s confessed.”

Asked what Trump has confessed to, he replied:

Well, he’s confessed to trying to hide the information in the whistleblower report! Well, look what Trump did. Trump took the transcript of the phone call and he put it over here in this secure area.”

He’s clearly hiding it. That’s a political move. The president’s ashamed. It’s the same as confessing that he’s guilty. We must move forward with impeachment.

The truth is that storing calls with foreign leaders has become standard operating procedure for the Trump administration. Shortly after he took office, the contents of his conversations with leaders of Mexico and Australia were leaked to the media. Ever since, they have stored all of his calls with world leaders in a secure area, out of necessity.

The disconnect between the whistleblower complaint and the actual conversation between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is breathtaking. Here is the relevant portion of the call. President Trump said:

Good because I heard you had a prosecutor who was very good and he was shut down and that’s really unfair. A lot of people are talking about that, the way they shut your very good prosecutor down and you had some very bad people involved. Mr. Giuliani is a highly respected man. He was the mayor of New York City, a great mayor, and I would like him to call you. I will ask him to call you along with the Attorney General. Rudy very much knows what’s happening and he is a very capable guy. If you could speak to him that would be great. The former ambassador from the United States, the woman, was bad news and the people she was dealing with in the Ukraine were bad news so I just want to let you know that. The other thing, There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it…It sounds horrible to me.

We have Biden on video telling an audience he did this. Then, when he’s called out on it, he spreads the lie that the prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, was corrupt. The opposite is true. Biden may want to read a sworn affidavit in an EU court in which Shokin describes the reality of the situation.

Trump’s request to find out more about Shokin’s investigation of Burisma and by extension, Biden’s son and Biden’s efforts to leverage U.S. aid to protect his son is perfectly legal.

Former President Bill Clinton signed the “Treaty with Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters” in 1999. This treaty calls for cooperation between the United States and Ukraine in the investigation and prosecution of crimes. Given the questionable judgement and actions of Hunter Biden, and Joe Biden’s admission that he forced the country to fire Shokin, this is exactly the type of situation this treaty was intended to address.

Certainly, the Democrats realize this is a very shaky foundation on which to build a case for the impeachment of a President. Their manufactured outrage makes them look hysterical, desperate and disingenuous.

Still, Trump has been forced to defend himself against these allegations. Meanwhile, the lies are repeated on an endless loop by the mainstream media which is, unfortunately, where many Americans get their news and on it goes.

Limbaugh continued:

All we have is a deep state leaker probably related in some way to John Brennan. The New York Times already outed the guy as a disgruntled CIA person, and the guy simply leaks a bunch of stuff, has his report written with the assistance of staffers on the Democrat side on the House Intelligence Committee, and calls himself a “whistleblower” for the protections that it offers! You watch. Every other future leak of major consequence like this is all of a sudden gonna be called “whistleblower” because of the statutory protections that are granted to whistleblowers.

I can’t emphasize enough that there isn’t anything real about any of this like there wasn’t anything real in Trump-Russia collusion. Let me clarify. There was a lot real in Trump-Russia collusion, but it was all the things committed by Brennan, Clapper, Comey, Obama, McCabe, Strzok Smirk, and that whole cast of characters. That was real. That effort to undermine Trump — to spy on Trump, to get the election result overturned — all of that stuff was real.

The things they were alleging Trump did, none of it happened. They’re still lying about the Mueller report. Democrats are out there saying the Mueller report proves that Trump colluded, 16 different times now. No, it doesn’t. It doesn’t say that at all. The Mueller report concludes that there wasn’t any collusion between Trump and Russia. But the Mueller report was written as a pre-impeachment document anyway. The Mueller report was written to be used as it is.

It was written with all the footnotes and the careful sentence structure to be able to be cited the way the Democrats are citing it. “Robert Mueller found collusion 16 different times!” No, he didn’t. “Well, right there it is: The president probably… The president might have this and that… Somebody here said…” It’s nothing but hearsay. There’s nothing. But the sheer power of the ruling class is what is on display here, and their literal panic and fright over having it all upended.

I agree with Limbaugh that the country is engaged in a Cold War. Americans haven’t been this divided since the actual Civil War. The Democrats have declared war against President Trump and those who support him. Instead of bullets, they use lies.

It is also similar to what Americans faced at the time of the Revolution in that this is a fight against tyranny. We are fighting an enemy who seeks power over us. If the Democrats should prevail, America as we’ve known her, will cease to exist.

The post Rush Limbaugh: America is in the Middle of a ‘Cold Civil War’ appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group civil-war-fighting-SCREENSHOT-300x161 Rush Limbaugh: America is in the Middle of a ‘Cold Civil War’ william barr Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky Rush Limbaugh Rudy Giuliani progressives President Trump Nancy Pelosi Mueller Investigation Joe Biden Impeachment of President Trump hunter biden Front Page Stories Featured Story fake news eric swalwell corruption Congress collusion cia Allow Media Exception Abuse of Power 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Is Trump Two Steps Ahead of UkraineGate? The Latest Twist in the “Whistleblowers” Missteps.

=========
=========
Promoted from the diaries by streiff. Promotion does not imply endorsement.
=========
=========

At what point is a whistleblower not one by definition? Much has been written the complete hearsay of their complaint, not to mention all of the descrepancies. It’s like whoever complained made it all up whole cloth.

The rules were simple before they were magically changed somehow to take away the firsthand knowledge requirement, just in time for this person to squeal from fake news reports and other Trump haters in the government and most likely Dems in Congress.

We actually don’t know if that change was made with the proper Federal Records Act procedures or whatever the applicable process is, of which I don’t pretend to know the ins and out. We deserve a paper trail to determine if this major change was actually done or just stamped on this particular complaint.

One person that commented on The Federalist article by Sean Davis said this:

Westlake Legal Group avatar92 Is Trump Two Steps Ahead of UkraineGate? The Latest Twist in the “Whistleblowers” Missteps. Uncategorized Front Page Stories

The Senate Intelligence Committee needs to immediately send to the CIA a documents preservation order so the revision files don’t “get lost”. I worked in the federal government for 40 years and I’ve done dozens of form revisions and the process is the same across the entire government.Shar

The way it works is the office responsible for the program, in this case probably the CIA IG, decides to revise the form. The new form is revised within the technical office by employees within the office. If they’re doing their jobs in accordance with the Federal Records Act and the Administrative Procedures Act, there is a document written that details exactly the rationale for the change, the impact of the changes, and what the new form looks like.

In the case of this form, since it involves a legal issue (the IC Whistleblower Protection Act) it also should have gone to the CIA or IC Office of General Counsel for a legal review to ensure the new form still complied with the Act. That file should also still be in the OGC’s office.

Finally the form is sent to the CIA’s HR department, specifically the Forms Control Officer. That office then reviews it to ensure the form complies with the CIA’s form control directive. When it does, the new form is formally approved by an official with the CIA’s HR department. The form is then printed (if hard copies are used) and also promulgated online, the old form is removed, and employees SOMETIMES are made aware that a new form is out. The HR file should also still be in the HR department.

If the form was developed and promulgated correctly there is an adequate paper trail to determine who and when the form was revised.

Sounds reasonable and someone with more knowledge can advise if this describes the process correctly.

We do know that the normal procedure is for a whistleblower (WB for short) is to file a complaint with the IG of their department. In September 2017, President Trump nominated Christopher Sharpley to be the CIA’s Inspector General and was acting in that role, until FoxNews reported late last July that he decided to step down after three decades of service and withdraw his IG nomination.

Sharpley is also withdrawing his inspector general nomination, CNN reported.

His reason for resigning from the agency and withdrawing his nomination was not immediately clear.

The Senate wasn’t prepared to advance Sharpley’s nomination until a resolution to complaints from two former CIA employees-turned-whistleblowers who alleged retaliation, according to a congressional aide who wasn’t authorized to discuss the matter publicly and spoke only on condition of anonymity.

“Sharpley figured out he wasn’t going to be confirmed and decided to step aside,” said John Tye, executive director of Whistleblower Aid, who is representing two of the complainants alleging retaliation.

One complainant is Jonathan Kaplan, 59, a former special agent and investigator in the inspector general’s office who spent 33 years at the CIA.

A second is Andrew Bakaj, 35, who worked in that office as a special agent from 2012 to 2015. He was instrumental in developing agency regulations governing whistleblower reprisal investigations.

Wait a minute! How many people are named Andrew Bakaj? Isn’t the WB’s lawyer at the We Pay Whistleblowers law firm?

Why that is him! What a coincidence! From just a few days ago, per the Washintonian.com:

Andrew Bakaj is lead counsel, while Mark Zaid is co-counsel. Both are well known national security attorneys. In an interview with Washingtonian, Zaid says the representation first came to Bakaj as a “a typical case referral,” and then Bakaj brought Zaid in to help. Before Bakaj founded his own firm, Compass Rose Legal Group, he was an investigator in the inspector general’s offices at both the CIA and the Department of Defense, working on probes into whistleblower reprisals. “He actually wrote the CIA’s internal rules on whistleblowing. He’s one of the best people suited for this representation,” says Zaid.  […]

Not only that, Bakaj has himself been a whistleblower. It’s how he and Zaid initially met, because Bakaj retained Zaid as his own counsel. Back when Bakaj worked for the CIA inspector general in 2014, he was retaliated against by superiors who wanted to out whistleblowers within the agency, according to a Yahoo News story from earlier this month. At the time, per the article: “The intelligence community’s inspector general, which conducts independent audits and reviews across the spy agencies, was investigating concerns about potential evidence manipulation at the CIA inspector general’s office, issues that Bakaj and others, some of whom still remain anonymous, had raised.”

Being that there is no CIA IG or acting one to my knowledge, I guess his (I’m sticking with that pronoun until told otherwise for ease) complaint had to be filed with the IC IG.

Yet that is not what happened. The WB first approached the CIA general council who then took the complaint to the White House Office of Legal Council.

Multiple people familiar with the matter told The New York Times that the whistleblower brought a broad complaint to Courtney Simmons Elwood, the CIA general counsel, the week after the July 25 phone call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. […]

Elwood tried to evaluate if there was a “reasonable basis” for the concerns raised by the anonymous whistleblower and spoke with John Eisenberg, a deputy White House counsel, the Times reports. According to the newspaper, the initial allegations brought to the CIA counsel only reported that major questions existed about one of Trump’s calls with a foreign leader, with the counsel later learning that multiple people raised concerns about the call. (my emphasis in bold)

ACLJ talked about this anomaly on their radio show yesterday and recapped here on their website:

This so-called whistleblower made a mistake. This person did not go to the Inspector General for the intelligence community, first, to avail themselves of the whistleblower statutes. This person went to the General Counsel at the CIA and told him about what they had overheard, not heard directly, overheard. It wasn’t until after that when this person filed the complaint.

Legally the allegations in this complaint are called hearsay. We established on the show yesterday that none of this would be admissible in court. This individual doesn’t even really qualify to be called a “whistleblower.” They didn’t even take necessary steps for the protection of anonymity granted to actual whistleblowers.

Surely the WH legal council advised the president, no?

And then the events as we know it unfolded. Trump released the call transript, the OLC’s opinion that it wasn’t a reliable account due to hearsay and had political bias against Trump’s rival, then Trump released the WB complaint. In essence, it seems like Trump knew what was coming and did his best to get out infront of the coming firestorm.

What are the chances he knew this would push Pelosi over the edge and call for a “real” impeachment inquiry and this time she’s not kidding. Well we still don’t have Articles of Impeachment nor a full House vote. Trump and every other Republican in the House should be demanding that all the people’s voices be heard. Take a full House vote now.

What gives one anonymous person who didn’t follow the Whistleblower Act procedures to put impeachment in motion?

The deep state saga continues while the Constitution is weeping after being trampled by the Democrats.

The post Is Trump Two Steps Ahead of UkraineGate? The Latest Twist in the “Whistleblowers” Missteps. appeared first on RedState.

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

Who is the Ukraine Leaker/Whistleblower, Part II

Westlake Legal Group justice-2060093_1280-620x413 Who is the Ukraine Leaker/Whistleblower, Part II Uncategorized Ukraine Politics New House investigations of Trump Never Trumpers Media Mainstream Media journalism International Affairs Impeachment of President Trump Hillary Clinton Government Front Page Stories Featured Story fake news donald trump democrats democrat media complex Democrat Lies crime corruption Corrupt Democrats Congress collusion cia biden Biased News Media Abuse of Power

 

I speculated on Thursday about the identity of the Ukraine phone call leaker based on an anonymous State Department source. This was early in the story, and much has been learned since then by intrepid independent journalists. I have come to believe that identity of the leaker (I refuse to call that person a “whistleblower”) is unimportant, as the reality is shaping up to be a conspiracy consisting of many players is at the heart of the story, and that the complainant is merely the front man intended to project a veneer of credibility on the whole gambit. Let’s review what we know and what we suspect.

1. What we know: Rudy Giuliani was approached by Kurt Volker, then the US Special Representative to Ukraine at the State Department, to meet with Andriy Yermak, a top adviser of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, in order to help facilitate a phone call and/or meeting between Zelensky and President Trump. Volker is concurrently the head of the McCain Institute for International Leadership and also a senior adviser at his old lobbying firm, BGR Group, which just happens to represent Ukraine.

What we suspect: David Kramer from the McCain Institute was involved in pushing/propagating the fake Russian dossier.

David Kramer, who had known McCain since his days at the State Department, is an expert on Russia and is involved with the McCain Institute for International Leadership. He was deposed in December 2017 as part of a legal battle waged by a Russian businessman Aleksej Gubarev over BuzzFeed’s publication of the dossier.

Kramer’s deposition — which reads like a spy thriller and offers an extraordinary behind-the-scenes lead up to the publication of the dossier — reveals that he circulated the dossier to multiple news organizations.

Read the rest here.

There are no such things as coincidences. John McCain was virulently anti-Trump, as were/are many in the McCain Institute. Kramer propagated the fake dossier, likely at McCain’s behest. Both Kramer and Volker were in the McCain Institute’s International Leadership group. Volker helped set up Guiliani contacts with Ukrainian officials. Occam’s razor says that this gambit was a repeat play of the beginnings of the Russian dossier hoax, with Volker’s resignation Friday adding suspicion to fuel the media’s fire. [Note: an alternative view to Volker’s resignation is that he was caught out and was forced to resign. Regardless, either reason makes him complicit in the conspiracy.]

2. What we know: Giuliani and Yermak spoke on the phone twice and met in Spain in July, the State Department was back-briefed by Giuliani after each instance, and a phone call between the two presidents took place in July. News of a “whistleblower” complaint against President Trump was reported by the Washington Post on 19 September, citing “two officials familiar with the report.” Here is a .pdf of the complaint itself released by the House Intelligence Committee just prior to testimony given by acting DNI Joseph Mcguire last Wednesday. The White House released a detailed summary of the phone call between the two presidents, which debunked most of the hearsay in the complaint. House Intelligence Committee Chairman opened his committed hearing on Thursday with his version of what the phone call consisted of, accusing the President of crimes and impeachable offenses. It was obviously a prepared statement that later in the hearing he pawned off as a “parody” because the released transcript summary completely disproved his fantasy. The President and several House Republicans have subsequently called for Schiff’s resignation for breaking House rules.

What we suspect: The complaint was delivered to Schiff (and Senator Burr’s Senate Intelligence Committee) on 12 August. As reported by several commentators, the complaint is very likely a composite written with the outside help (likely lawyers). For example, there is this from Fred Fleitz, formerly deputy assistant to the president and to the chief of staff of the National Security Council:

From my experience, such an extremely polished whistleblowing complaint is unheard of. This document looks as if this leaker had outside help, possibly from congressional members or staff.

Read the rest here.

Schiff has had the complaint for over a month, and he and his staff have had plenty of time to seed and spin the complaint – which was solely based on second- and third-hand information – falsely throughout the news media. And that is exactly what has happened. A simple web search results in a whole host of legacy media stories that are “going with the spin,” i.e., that POTUS is “guilty” of a whole host of criminal activities. The story has evolved as previous breathless claims have been proven false, too. Here are a few headline examples:

  • As the Whistle-Blower Story Gets Worse for Trump, His Corruption Keeps Spreading (WaPo – 19 Sep)
  • Trump responds to Ukraine whistleblower scandal with contradictions and transparent falsehoods (Vox – 20 Sep)
  • The Ukraine Whistleblower Complaint Makes Impeachment More Likely (WaPo – 23 Sep)
  • Whistle-Blower Is Said to Allege Concerns About White House Handling of Ukraine Call (NY Times – 25 Sep)
  • Whistleblower report reveals how far Trump’s dubious ethics have spread (The Guardian – 26 Sep)
  • White House Lawyers Worked to Obscure Memo of Trump’s Ukraine Call, Whistleblower Claims (National Law Journal – 26 Sep)
  • Not Just Ukraine: Whistleblower Says the White House Is Hiding Other Damaging Documents (Mother Jones – 26 Sep)
  • Pelosi says Trump engaged in ‘cover-up’ to hide Ukraine call records (Politico – 26 Sep)

Notice how the headlines shift to “cover-up” and other process-oriented allegations and peripheral matters after the basic complaint was determined to be based on hearsay and contained false allegations there were exposed by the release of the phone transcript summary. The media piling on and running with rumors and allegations subsequently disproved and then shifting to other process-related allegations is EXACTLY the modus operandi of the Russia hoax that we’ve seen unfold over the past two years.

3. What we know: Michael Atkinson, the inspector general for the intelligence community, authorized the changing of the whistleblower disclosure form to allow the use of hearsay information in late September:

https://twitter.com/ClimateAudit/status/1177580473566093312

Previously, only first-hand information was allowed on the form, and indeed a complaint could not be registered at all unless it contained information personally witnessed by the complainant, as noted in this report from The Federalist.

The internal properties of the newly revised “Disclosure of Urgent Concern” form, which the intelligence community inspector general (ICIG) requires to be submitted under the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act (ICWPA), show that the document was uploaded on September 24, 2019, at 4:25 p.m., just days before the anti-Trump complaint was declassified and released to the public. The markings on the document state that it was revised in August 2019, but no specific date of revision is disclosed.

Read the rest here.

What we suspect: The IC IG was previously the Senior Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General of the National Security Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ-NSD). As such, he provided legal advice to disgrace former Obama officials John Carlin and Mary McCord were heavily involved in the “get Trump” operation in 2016 (those two subsequently resigned because they were implicated in lying to FISC Judge Collyer about the Russia dossier and the Carter Page FISA application). That makes Atkinson part of the Deep State swamp. It cannot be a coincidence that he authorized the change of the whistleblower disclosure form and then magically and nearly concurrently forwarded the complaint to congressional committees. He needs to explain this on the record with some very pointed questions asked!

4. What we know: interestingly, there is a Ukraine-US treaty signed by Bill Clinton in 1998 that provides important background on the Trump-Zelenskiy phone call that of course the legacy media ignore. The treaty is entitled, “Treaty with Ukraine on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters.” The treaty binds the two countries together and obligates them to collaborate in exchanging information on criminal activities in either country. I like this quote from the letter of transmittal:

Mutual assistance available under the Treaty includes: taking of testimony or statements of persons; providing documents, records, and articles of evidence; serving documents; locating or identifying persons; transferring persons in custody for testimony or other purposes; executing requests for searches and seizures; assisting in proceedings related to restrain confiscation, forfeiture of assets, restitution, and collection of fines; and any other form of assistance not prohibited by the laws of the requested state.

What we suspect: Gee, what did POTUS discuss with Zelenskiy again? Why, soliciting Ukraine’s help in getting to the bottom of potential Ukrainian-based interference in the 2016 election, in particular Crowdstrike. And it was Zelenskiy who brought up Biden’s name during the conversation. The Burisma-Biden corruption would be entirely covered under this mutual assistance treaty, too, meaning that President Trump was fulfilling his obligations as head of state under the treaty during that phone call. The accusations by the complainant are thus further proven to be false.

5. What we know: in response to my speculative article here on RedState Thursday conveying who I thought the complainant was based on a single anonymous State Department source and supporting analysis, Drew Harrell from the WaPo contacted me for a statement, parts of which he used in a story published in the WaPo here on Saturday. The main theme of the story is to examine “far-right amateur sleuths” who are trying to expose the complainant. Here are the excerpts about me:

The guessing game took another twist after the New York Times reported the complaint was made by a CIA officer detailed to the White House. A conservative writer, Stu Cvrk, tweeted out his guess a few hours later.

“Is This Guy The Ukraine Phone Call Whistleblower?” Cvrk tweeted, linking to a post he wrote on RedState, a conservative news and commentary site.

“A source known to me at the State Department, who will remain anonymous, tells me that everyone is pointing to Edward ‘Ned’ Price as the whistleblower who came forward with the accusation that President Trump ‘abused his office’ during a phone conversation with the Ukrainian president,” wrote Cvrk. Price is a former CIA officer who retired in 2017 and is now a political analyst for NBC News.

Price, who was more amused than upset at the claim, said it made him concerned about the development of “discourse that is just divorced from the facts.”

“It’s part of the political atmosphere that we live in now,” Price said. “People are looking for anything on which to hang their tinfoil hats.”

Cvrk, in a direct Twitter message to The Post, stood by his assessment. “You didn’t seriously think he would admit it, did you?” he wrote, adding that he was insulted by the inference “that I am a tinfoil hat guy.”

What we suspect: I’ll gladly accept the pejorative of being lumped with “far-right amateur sleuths” and wear that badge proudly. I and many other independents are doing the real digging and exposing the truth about both the Russia hoax and now the Ukraine political hit-job. While Harrell kindly quoted me accurately, he left out the other comments I sent to him which tell the whole story and place the above comments in complete context:

[Price is] a political hack. You didn’t seriously think he would admit to it, did you? It is no coincidence that his Twitter feed aligns with the evolution of the evolving hit piece aka “WB.” Just as Steele was the face of the dossier (hiding people who contributed to it), someone served the same function in this charade, as the “complaint” was a composite almost certainly written by multiple people including Democrat lawyers. Whether Price was the front-man or not, it’s clear he knew abt it and is serving as an agit-prop disseminator. Same modus operandi as the Russia hoax is in play. My piece was speculative. The fact that the complaint was not based on firsthand info and has demonstrably false info should lead investigative journalists (almost an oxymoron these days) to find out who and why the complaint was false, as well as who specifically wrote it, not go after those of us who are actually trying to find that out. It is absolutely clear that whoever submitted the false complaint was a political operative acting under false pretenses.

[W]ho at WaPo is looking into who actually wrote the complaint and why nobody with firsthand knowledge of the phone call didn’t submit a complaint if it was all so “egregious.” Do u seriously think the complaint was written by the person who submitted it after it was laundered thru Schiff’s office beginning in August?

Judge for yourself. It’s no surprise that the WaPo sees to disparage independent journalists and commentators, as we are not only direct competition to them, but we also expose their routine #FakeNews at every opportunity. The WaPo has been virulently anti-Trump since before he was inaugurated and has led the charge specifically on this Ukraine complainant hit-job from the very beginning.

6. Here’s a summary of what I think REALLY transpired:

  • The same playbook is being used in both political-hit-jobs: orchestrate a set of false allegations; work behind the scenes using Deep State actors to implicate Trump associates in activities that appear to support the allegations; spread the false allegations everywhere through willing media, elected Democrats, non-profit organizations, and others; and clamor for hearings, recusals, and a public show trial to support impeachment of POTUS.
  • Kurt Volker (McCain Institute) helped to repeat that the Russia hoax gambit just like David Kramer did with the Russian dossier. He facilitated the Giuliani contacts with the Ukrainians and then resigned (potentially to make it look bad for the President). What Volker didn’t count on was Giuliani retaining all pertinent texts and emails proving his interactions with Ukrainians were both above board and also solicited by Volker et al at the State Department.
  • A complaint by an unknown individual formally dated 12 August was lodged with the IC IG accusing the President of unlawful conduct. The complaint was later determined to have been based on second- and third-hand knowledge and laundered immediately through Adam Schiff’s committee.
  • The IC IG (who worked previously as chief legal counsel to two Obama DoJ people who resigned in disgrace) conveniently approved a change to the whistleblower disclosure form to allow the incorporation of second-hand information in the complaint (the new form was updated to DNI servers AFTER the Ukraine complaint was submitted).
  • The media ran with all sorts of stories accusing Giuliani and the President of “seeking a quid pro quo,” strong-arming the Ukrainians, etc., and then shifted to supposed process crimes, obstruction, and peripheral matters after POTUS had the summary transcript of the phone call released, proving that there was NO quid pro quo.
  • The media conveniently have ignored the US-Ukraine mutual assistance treaty signed by Clinton that authorizes exchange of records and information associated with criminal activities – exactly what was discussed during that phone call and further discrediting the complainant’s allegations.
  • Finally, the real purpose of the complaint cannot have been to further the Democrats’ impeachment agenda, as the conspirators surely knew that the phone call transcript summary and other records would disprove all the false allegations. The Democrats know that AG Barr and USA Durham are investigating the origins of the Russia hoax, which leads directly to Ukraine. In addition, the Bidens’ Ukrainian-related corruption (Joe’s blatant obstruction captured on video, and Hunter’s straight corruption with Burisma), and Hillary’s 2016 election shenanigans with Crowdstrike are daggers pointed at all of their black hearts – as well as at some Uniparty Republicans who benefited, too. As much as anything, I believe this gambit was as much about getting Barr to recuse himself and slow the whole investigative process down in hopes that either Trump would be impeached or some Democrat nominee would steal the 2020 election, after which point the whole mess could be swept under the rug.

Oh, and by the way, the name of the leaker/complainant doesn’t matter all that much. What really counts is exposing the entire conspiracy. The leaker/complainant was just a pawn. Viable candidates include Mike Barry, Kurt Volker, and, yes, Ned Price (or someone who fits their anti-Trump profiles). Finding out who did it is gravy.

The end.

The post Who is the Ukraine Leaker/Whistleblower, Part II appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group justice-2060093_1280-300x200 Who is the Ukraine Leaker/Whistleblower, Part II Uncategorized Ukraine Politics New House investigations of Trump Never Trumpers Media Mainstream Media journalism International Affairs Impeachment of President Trump Hillary Clinton Government Front Page Stories Featured Story fake news donald trump democrats democrat media complex Democrat Lies crime corruption Corrupt Democrats Congress collusion cia biden Biased News Media Abuse of Power   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com