Sunday, June 25, 2017

A Window Into The Heart Of President Trump

From: John Porter
To: Americans Everywhere

A Photo of the President, worth a thousand words.
Please try to understand the weight of this image.
This soldier lost both arms. 
The feeling of a handshake is now lost to him.
President Trump realized this, and so touched his face in order for the soldier to be able to feel the human connection, this is what I see when I think of Trump's motives.
He gave up a billionaire lifestyle to now be insulted, dragged through the mud, and lied about, on a daily basis.

All to save this Republic and people he loves.

Saturday, June 24, 2017

Violent Democrats: Attacking And Killing Republicans Since 1866


By Frances Rice
As author Michael Scheuer wrote, the Democratic Party is the party of the four S’s: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism.
In contrast, as one pundit wrote, the Republican Party is the party of the four F’s: faith, family, freedom and fairness.
From the inception of the Republican Party in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, Democrats have viscerally opposed the values of Republicans.
Imbued with deep-seated hatred of Republicans, Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan in 1866 that became the terrorist arm of the Democratic Party.
The Klan killed over 3,000 Republicans, 1000 white and over 2,000 black Republicans.
In his book, A SHORT HISTORY OF RECONSTRUCTION, Dr Eric Foner wrote:
 “Founded in 1866 as a Tennessee social club, the Ku Klux Klan spread into nearly every Southern state, launching a ‘reign of terror‘ against Republican Party leaders, black and white.
“In effect, the Klan was a military force serving the interests of the Democratic Party, the planter class, and all those who desired the restoration of white supremacy.
“Jack Dupree was a victim of a particularly brutal murder in Monroe County, Mississippi.
“Assailants cut his throat and disemboweled him, all within sight of his wife, who had just given birth to twins.
“Jack Dupree was ‘president of a Republican club‘ and known as a man who ‘would speak his mind.’”
Today, Democrats continue their reign of terror against Republicans, as demonstrated in the below article.

By Pamela Geller
We know this but they are saying it, they are telling us with impunity.
They want a civil war or surrender.
Below is an alarming article.
By Peter Hasson

Behind the mass protests, choreographed chants and acts of violence, leaders of anti-Trump “resistance” efforts are communicating the same simple but dark message: they want to make America “ungovernable” for the president of the United States.
These protesters say they will do whatever it takes to keep Trump from enacting his agenda, and many of them have shown a willingness to destroy public property, assault law enforcement officers and inflict violence upon their fellow citizens.
In the days and weeks leading up to the inauguration, DisruptJ20 publicly advertised an invitation to “Join us in refusing to normalize Trump’s presidency, smashing his facade of legitimacy.”
DisruptJ20 advocates using “direct action” tactics, which the group describes as taking “collective action to make social change without giving power over to an authority or middle person.”
“We don’t ask permission or put our faith in electoral politics, instead, we use our bodies to stop the smooth operation of the system we oppose,” the group’s website states, citing Black Lives Matter’s efforts to shut down highways as an example of the kind of disruption they have in mind. The group is open about its aim to become “an ungovernable force this winter.”
A website called Ungovernable 2017 helped coordinate DisruptJ20’s DC efforts with anti-Trump protests around the country. Some groups endorsed a pledge to never give Trump the “chance to govern.”
“As we resist, we will create new governing institutions, new economic relationships, and new ways of being human,” the pledge reads.
The pledge was endorsed by a number of left-wing figures including: the Malcolm X Grassroots Movement, a black nationalist organization with chapters in eight cities across the country; activist and 2008 Green Party vice presidential nominee Rosa Clemente; and Lamis Deek, lawyer and a New York board member for the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR).
Mass demonstrations against Trump have continued around the country in the weeks since his inauguration. Over a week ago featured an activist calling for murder over a megaphone. The activist, reportedly associated with the Black Lives Matter movement, said that protesters “need to start killing people” and “start killing the White House.”
Milo Yiannopoulos, an editor at pro-Trump website Breitbart, was forced to cancel a speech at UC Berkeley last week after mobs of protesters started fires, assaulted bystanders and pepper sprayed suspected Trump supporters as part of an organized effort to shut down the speech.
Those protests were spear-headed by a national group calling themselves Refuse Fascism. The group is open about its apparent alliance with Princeton professor and DNC platform committee member Cornel West, who is listed as one of Refuse Fascism’s “initiators.” A spokesperson for West did not return a request for comment.
Video posted to Refuse Fascism’s Facebook page last week features one of the group’s leaders whipping a throng of protesters into a frenzy with calls of revolution. “We need to make this country ungovernable,” she declares. “We need to do what the German people should have done when Hitler was elected.”
Far-left activist group Occupy Oakland also took part in last week’s Berkeley riots. The group, a local spinoff from the 2011 Occupy Wall Street protests, declared victory after Milo’s speech was cancelled due to their mob-like tactics. The group circulated a picture on Twitter of two of its banners from the protest reading, “Become ungovernable” and “This is war.”
“We won this night. We will control the streets. We will liberate the land. We will fight fascists. We will dismantle the state,” Occupy Oakland captioned the photo. “This is war.”
EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Geller Report. 

Friday, June 23, 2017

BREAKING! Senate announces probe of Loretta Lynch behavior in 2016 election

By Stephen Dinan

The Senate Judiciary Committee has opened a probe into former Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s efforts to shape the FBI’s investigation into 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, the committee’s chairman announced Friday.

In a letter to Ms. Lynch, the committee asks her to detail the depths of her involvement in the FBI’s investigation, including whether she ever assured Clinton confidantes that the probe wouldn’t “push too deeply into the matter.”
Fired FBI Director James B. Comey has said publicly that Ms. Lynch tried to shape the way he talked about the investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s emails, and he also hinted at other behavior “which I cannot talk about yet” that made him worried about Ms. Lynch’s ability to make impartial decisions.
Mr. Comey said that was one reason why he took it upon himself to buck Justice Department tradition and reveal his findings about Mrs. Clinton last year.
The probe into Ms. Lynch comes as the Judiciary Committee is already looking at President Trump’s firing of Mr. Comey.
Sen. Charles E. Grassley, chairman of the committee, said the investigation is bipartisan. The letter to Ms. Lynch is signed by ranking Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein and also by Sens. Lindsey Graham and Sheldon Whitehouse, the chairman and ranking member of the key investigative subcommittee.
Letters also went to Clinton campaign staffer Amanda Renteria and Leonard Benardo and Gail Scovell at the Open Society Foundations. Mr. Benardo was reportedly on an email chain from the then-head of the Democratic National Committee suggesting Ms. Lynch had given assurances to Ms. Renteria, the campaign staffer, that the Clinton probe wouldn’t “go too far.”
At a Senate hearing earlier this month, Mr. Comey told lawmakers that Ms. Lynch had attempted to change the way the FBI described its probe of Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private email server. The change appeared to dovetail with how Mrs. Clinton’s supporters were characterizing the probe.
“At one point, [Ms. Lynch] directed me not to call it an ‘investigation’ but instead to call it a ‘matter,’ which confused me and concerned me,” Mr. Comey said during his June 8 testimony before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. “That was one of the bricks in the load that led me to conclude I have to step away from the department if we are to close this case credibly.”
Acknowledging that he didn’t know whether it was intentional, Mr. Comey said Ms. Lynch’s request “gave the impression the attorney general was looking to align the way we talked about our investigation with the way a political campaign was describing the same activity.”
Mr. Comey said the language suggested by Ms. Lynch was troublesome because it closely mirrored what the Clinton campaign was using. Despite his discomfort, Mr. Comey said, he agreed to Ms. Lynch’s language.

Johnny Depp Asks When Was the Last Time 'An Actor Assassinated a President' Suggests 'Maybe It's Time'

By Lauretta Brown

Appearing at the Glastonbury Music Festival Thursday evening, Johnny Depp asked the audience, “When was the last time an actor assassinated a president?"

Depp was apparently alluding to the assassination of President Lincoln by actor John Wilkes Booth in Ford’s Theatre in 1865.
"I'm not insinuating anything,” he added, “by the way this will be in the press and it will be horrible.”
As the crowd cheered, Depp said: "I want to clarify I'm not an actor, I lie for a living. However, it’s been awhile and maybe it’s time.”
Depp introduced the topic by saying he thinks "Trump needs help," saying, "there are a lot of dark places he could go."
The Secret Service said in a statement that they were "aware of the comment in question. For security reasons, we cannot discuss specifically nor in general terms the means and methods of how we perform our protective responsibilities.”
Depp has never been a fan of Trump and called him a “brat” at an appearance last year.
“There's something created about him in the sense of bullydom. But what he is, I believe, is a brat," Depp said at the time, discussing his role portraying Trump in a Funny or Die movie.
Depp said in another interview last year that “if Donald Trump is elected president of the United States, in a kind of historical way it’s exciting because we will see the actual last president of the United States, it just won’t work after that.”
The assassination joke comes at a particularly sensitive time following a gunman's targeting of GOP lawmakers at a Congressional baseball practice that seriously injured Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) who is still recovering in the hospital.
Celebrities seems to think threats on the president’s life are edgy and cool, judging by Kathy Griffin’s recent video depicting Trump’s severed head, which she later apologized for, and singer Moby’s recent music video in which a cartoon Trump is blown up.

Good riddance to the Russia myth

New York Post 

— and blame Team Obama for promoting it

By Post Editorial Board
Ex-Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson’s testimony Wednesday should mark the definitive end of “Russia hacked the election” hysteria. Too bad it took so long to get to this point.
Johnson told the House Intelligence Committee outright that the Russians failed to alter “ballots, ballot counts or reporting of election results.”
Yes, it’s clear Russia (with Vladimir Putin’s full approval) orchestrated cyberattacks designed to influence the 2016 contest, and also pushed fake news.
But the hack, and release via WikiLeaks, etc., of Democratic emails produced nothing game-changing. The biggest impact was to confirm the obvious: The Democratic National Committee favored Hillary Clinton from the start.
And fake news mainly feeds people’s existing prejudices — which serves Putin’s goal of undermining our democracy, but fails to flip votes from one party to the other.
Johnson also made it plain that Democrats didn’t take the problem too seriously: “The FBI and the DNC had been in contact with each other months before about the intrusion, and the DNC did not feel it needed DHS’s assistance at that time.”
Johnson also explained why the Obama administration kept quiet on the threat. The White House, he recalled, argued that a public admission of possible Russian interference might be seen as an effort to influence the election — particularly since Donald Trump was warning “the election was going to be rigged.”
That is: Because Obama was fervently campaigning for Clinton, the White House figured that raising alarms about Russian interference would seem mere electioneering.
Was it more worried that this would undermine faith in the election, or just that it would help Trump? Note that Team Obama vetoed then-FBI Director James Comey’s plan to publish a late-summer op-ed warning of Russia’s efforts to interfere — which would’ve been the least political-seeming way to get the message out.
Also that when Team Obama finally did go public on the threat, it was after that “Access Hollywood” tape seemed to spell disaster for Trump.
And that the administration didn’t take action until after Election Day, when it slapped Moscow with new sanctions — putting the question of Russian interference on Page One only after Trump had won.
It’s good that the hysteria has finally died down, but too bad Team Obama’s handling of it all helped produce so much misdirected hysteria in the first place.

It's Here: Senate Unveils New Obamacare Repeal Bill

By Katie Pavlich

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell officially revealed the Senate's version of the American Healthcare Act Thursday morning, better known as the Obamacare repeal bill passed by the House.

"In the many years since Obamacare was imposed on the American people, it has continued to hurt the people we represent — over, and over, and over again. Higher costs. Fewer choices. Pain and heartbreak for the middle class. We’ve watched Obamacare unravel before our very eyes with each passing year. Now it teeters on the edge of collapse, and we face a choice — allow the unsustainable Obamacare status quo to continue hurting more Americans, or take action to finally move forward," McConnell said during a speech on the Senate floor. "More Americans are going to get hurt unless we do something."

Here's what we know so far, according to McConnell:

-Repeals the Obamacare individual mandate

-Repeals the Obamacare employer mandate 

-Improves the affordability of health insurance

-Eliminates costly Obamacare taxes, including the medical device tax

-Expands tax free health savings accounts

-Deploys tax credits to make coverage more affordable

-Shifts power from Washington D.C. to the states

-Stabilizes the health insurance market with a $15 billion, four year fund

-Transitions away from Obamacare entirely, but not right away 

-Protects coverage of preexisting conditions

-Allows parents to keep their children on their health insurance until they are 26-years-old

The legislation has not been scored by the Congressional Budget Office, but an estimated cost of the bill is expected Friday or Monday. It is being classified as a "discussion draft" and is open for changes and amendments.
The bill is 142 pages long. The Obamacare bill, also known as the Affordable Care Act, is 2300 pages with 20,000 additional pages of regulations.
You can read the legislation by clicking here.
Republicans must reach 50 votes for passage. Vice President Mike Pence will cast vote 51. Eight Republicans have expressed skepticism the legislation can deliver on promises made to voters.

The Democrats Are Health Care Reform Hypocrites!

Democrat complaints that they haven’t been included in the negotiations on replacing Obamacare should be seen as purely efforts to score political points and obstruct the process.
 Sen. McCaskill was confronted with this fact this morning when she was reminded that every Senate Democrat signed a letter to Republicans in early May stating they would refuse to negotiate with Republicans unless repeal and replace language was dropped. A petty request.
And remember, Sen. Schumer stated on multiple occasions that Senate Democrats would not be working with Republicans, saying at the beginning of the process, “Not a single Democrat is negotiating.” 
Sen. McCaskill went on to argue that eliminating the tax increases in Obamacare is a bad idea saying, “Why do we need to give rich people a tax break right now to take health care away from Americans? What is the deal there? Why does the 1 percent -- the 1 percent in this country is doing great. My family doesn't need a tax cut.” 
But, Sen. McCaskill has been called out on her claim that these tax increases only effected wealthy Americans, when in fact they actually hurt many income levels. Politifact labeled her similar claims on this issue in January as “mostly false.” 
Finally, Sen. McCaskill’s choice to use her own family as an example of those who don’t need a tax cut is an interesting one given her long history of tax avoidance. 

SAM STEIN: About a couple months ago, there was some talk, led primarily by Senator Bill Cassidy about putting together some sort of compromise legislation that obviously wouldn't give Democrats what they wanted, but wouldn’t be a full repeal and replace of Obamacare.
And, Democrats made the conscious decision to not partake in those talks. They said you have to take repeal and replace fully off the table before we join the table. Was that a mistake? You might end up with a strictly republican authored bill. You could have potentially had something that was far more moderate, but you chose not to do it. 
SENATOR CLAIRE MCCASKILL (D-MO): Well, I'm not sure that we would have had something that was far more moderate. Because, there was not enough Republicans that were interested in avoiding the repeal and replace reality. So I'm not sure that was a viable alternative.
In Early May, Every Senate Democrat Signed A Letter To Republican Leaders Stating The Only Way Democrats Would Negotiate On Health Care Reform Was If Republicans Dropped Repeal Language: 
“Senate Democrats On Tuesday [May 9] Sent A Letter To Republican Leaders Urging Them To Drop Their Efforts To Repeal And Replace Obamacare And Instead To Work With Them On Drafting Fixes To The Healthcare Law.” (Robert King and Kimberly Leonard, “Senate Democrats urge GOP to halt repeal efforts,” Washington Examiner, 5/9/17)
Sen. Chuck Schumer Declared That Democrats Are Not Working With Republicans On Healthcare Reform, Saying “Until They [Republicans] Back Off Repeal, There's Really Nothing We Can Talk About.
SCHUMER: “We said all along, we say to this day, get off this repeal. Look, we have made real progress over the last several years, 20 million people covered who weren't covered, preexisting conditions taken care of, 21-to-26-year-olds getting coverage. The list goes on. We said, back off repeal, which would walk back many of these things incompletely or by degree, and we will work with you to fix it.” TAPPER: “But what...” SCHUMER: “They still haven't gotten up to the first stage. Until they back off repeal, there's really nothing we can talk about.” (CNN’s “The Lead With Jake Tapper, 5/9/17)
Democrats Have Long Refused To Work With Republicans On Fixing Obamacare:
Sen. Chuck Schumer Declared In February That “Not A Single Democrat Is Negotiating” On A Replacement For Obamacare. “‘Not a single Democrat is negotiating,’ Schumer said on a call organized by MoveOn and the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. ‘We ain’t resting until the move to repeal the ACA has a dagger through its heart.’” (David Weigel, “Schumer: No Democrat Is Compromising With GOP On Obamacare Replacement,” The Washington Post, 1/10/17)
Schumer Has Threatened To Filibuster Any Repeal Of Obamacare. “Schumer said Democrats would use that same 60-vote threshold to protect Obamacare from President Donald Trump and the Republicans in Congress who are vowing to dismantle it.” (Ted Barrett, “Schumer: Democratic Opposition Holding Against Gorsuch, Obamacare Repeal,” CNN, 2/21/17)
All House Democrats Voted Against The Republican Sponsored Healthcare Reform Bill. “Earlier, the Republican proposal passed the House by a vote of 217 to 213. All 193 Democrats voted against the bill. They were joined by 20 Republicans who voted ‘no.’ The GOP-sponsored bill now goes to the Senate, where approval could prove more difficult as Republicans hold a slimmer majority in that chamber.” (Christine Wang, “GOP Either Doesn’t Know The Facts Or Doesn’t Care About People, Pelosi Says After Health Bill Vote,” CNBC, 5/4/17)
  • House Democrats Acted Childishly After The Vote, Chanting At Republicans On The House Floor. “As giddy Republicans clapped when they got the necessary 216 votes to pass the bill effectively replacing Obamacare, members of the Democratic party broke out into: ‘Na Na Hey Hey Kiss Him Goodbye,’ singing to the conservatives in the room. The song signaled what many Democrats believe will be a turning point for Republicans -- a vote that will ultimately lose GOP members votes and end the Republican majority in the House.” (Miranda Green, “Dems To GOP After AHCA Vote: ‘Hey Hey Hey, Goodbye,’” CNN, 5/4/17)
  • Former President Obama Urged Democrats To Not “Rescue” Republicans By Helping Them Pass Replacement Measures. “In a Capitol Hill pep talk Wednesday, Obama urged Democrats not to ‘rescue’ Republicans by helping them pass replacement measures, according to sources in the room.” (MJ Lee, “How The Tables Are Turning On ObamaCare,” CNN, 1/9/17)

Complied By The Republican National Committee

Wednesday, June 21, 2017

Handel wins handily, Democrats 0 for 5, pollsters wrong again

By Dr. Rich Swier

In an article titled Heavily Funded Democrat Falls Short as Georgia House Seat Stays Republican The Daily Signal’s Rachel del Guidice reports:
Republican Karen Handel soundly defeated Democrat Jon Ossoff in Tuesday’s closely watched, historically expensive race for the congressional seat once held by GOP superstar Newt Gingrich.
Handel, 55, a businesswoman who was Georgia’s secretary of state, had 127,021 votes or 53 percent with 99 percent of precincts reporting.
Ossoff, 30, a documentary filmmaker and former congressional aide who does not live in the House district, had 114,390 votes or 47 percent.
Polls had the race going down to the wire.
Additionally, conservative businessman Ralph Norman (R-SC) defeated liberal Archie Parnell (D-SC) in the special election for Congress in South Carolina’s 5th district.
There are four takeaway points from these five races:
1.   Trump and his make America great again agenda is a winner for Republicans.
2.   Money is no longer king when it comes to winning elections (see 1 above).
3.   The political pollsters still can’t get it right when it comes to predicting election outcomes (see 1 above).
4.   The Democrat Party is in big trouble and needs to rethink what it is doing at the local level. They are out of touch and out of office (see 1 above).

Tuesday, June 20, 2017

Why Should We Trust Mueller?

By Kurt Schlichter

What really stinks is that Robert Mueller may very well be as squared away as people say he is, and it doesn’t matter. The guy is a Purple Heart, Bronze Star Marine, and not a soldier-trashing fraud like John Kerry either. He’s served his country and may be trying to do it again in the context of a fake scandal that has degenerated from “Trump made a pact with Putin BECAUSE TREASON!” to “Trump almost made Comey cry BECAUSE OBSTRUCTION!”

All that’s left of Felonia von Pantsuit’s original lie, created to ease the searing pain of her utter rejection, is the establishment’s wishcasting that Trump somehow obstructed an investigation of nothing.
Regardless, I don’t want to be cynical, though bitter experience compels it. I hope Mueller is as honest as people keep saying he is. I hope he has the integrity people keep telling me he has. I hope that not everyone who has ever held a position of responsibility within the Beltway is an establishment agenda-driven hack trying to squelch Trump and the voices of all those peons who voted for him.
But hope isn’t enough.
The establishment is praising Mueller up and down. They tell me he’s honest. They tell me he’s incorruptible. But they also told me Jim Comey was a towering paragon of virtue instead of a towering pile of Harry Reid.
Everything else the establishment tells us is a lie, so why not this? How has the establishment earned our trust on Mueller when it has lied to our faces for decades?
The establishment demands our trust, so it bears the burden of proving this isn’t just another scam.
What, exactly, is the evidence that the fix is not already in, that no matter what, Robert Mueller isn’t going to come out with some bunch of nonsense and innuendo that will give the impeachment-addict Democrats and the puff-boy Republicans, who don’t really want to drain the swamp they prosper in, the green light to go along with the soft coup the establishment’s been dreaming of?
Why should we believe this isn’t rigged? Because people in D.C. promise us that “Hey, this guy is honest?”
I guess we’re supposed to think “Yeah, well this time they’ve got to be telling us the truth. They’re totally due.”
But here’s the problem – we now have lots of new facts that change the original picture of our esteemed special counsel.
Yes, as the Democrat steno pool that is the media has pointed out as we got woke to what’s happening, a lot of conservatives (including me) were initially satisfied with Mueller when he was appointed to investigate the Trump/Russia connection that everyone now admits doesn’t exist.
But then came some troubling revelations which – whoa! – made us re-evaluate our prior understanding. So we – brace yourselves! – changed our minds in the face of new evidence.
Let’s look at all of the evidence.
Mueller seems like a good guy. War hero. No scandals as FBI director. Not a known scumbag or skeevy perv. In Washington terms, the last one alone puts him miles ahead of the competition.
But now we find out that he’s Leaky Jim Comey’s bestest buddy there ever was. These guys are pals, and now Mueller is going to investigate the dude who fired his amigo? Does that seem cool to you?
If the HR Department at work is investigating you, do they pick as the lead investigator the guy you go drink Budweiser with?
Sure they do, unless Chet the Unicorn is free, because the only thing more unlikely than picking a key player in the investigation’s friend to do it is picking a damn unicorn to do it.
So, Jim Comey – whose hurt feelings seem to be the only thing left of this Schumer-show of a scandal – is the key guy in the pseudo-scandal, and he’s got a motive to shaft the president, yet his friend is investigating it and somehow that’s supposed to be A-OK?
Didn’t Comey admit that he leaked info after getting fired in order to get a special counsel appointed?
And didn’t Comey say he’s been meeting with Mueller and they’ve been chatting it up secretly? Did Mueller read him his rights? Why not?
Sounds super above-board.
And Comey says Mueller is awesome. So do the Democrats.
I’m feeling pretty confident this isn’t rigged.
What do you think, Chet the Unicorn?
What’s that, Chet?
You have your doubts?
Bad, wicked, cynical unicorn, listening to fake news!
Oh, and it gets better.
My intrepid fellow Townhall columnist and friend Derek Hunter dug up the fact that Mueller did exactly the same thing as Trump is accused of doing with regard to the Waco massacre. Of course, in the case, such as it is, of Flynn, no one barbecued any children.
Hey, if someone accuses me of a bogus non-crime (because what Honest Jim says Trump did is not remotely a crime), can Derek investigate me? If not, why not?
But let’s put aside that the pal of a potential perjurer is heading the investigation of something he himself did.
Let’s look closer.
Hey, who’s helping Mueller out?
I bet it’s another bunch of pros with no agenda we can put our confidence in because elite insiders are incorruptible.
Well, Mueller’s hiring some folks and their donation histories are on that helpful Federal Election Commission web site.
Now guess what they are.
Go ahead. Guess.
Well, luckily there’s so little partisanship these days that this makes no difference, say the people who support their party.
After all, these are public servants of impeccable integrity and stuff who won’t let party get in the way of blah blah blah blah blah blah.
Let me offer you a complete list of non-conservatives who have stood up against this fascist witch hunt and the Deliverance-esque canoe trip that liberals are taking with the concept of justice:
Alan Dershowitz. Jonathan Turley.
That is all.
Nope, neither one of them is on the Mueller Team.
What’s up with that?
But hey, I’m sure that a president who has made a point of attacking the establishment will get a fair shake from a special counsel who is as establishment as establishment comes and who is a close friend of the main accuser and who heads a team that is composed entirely of establishment Democrat donors.
Seems legit.
Well, D.C. legit.
Mueller needs to resign – that’s what a guy with unimpeachable integrity does when he realizes his personal relationships give the appearance of impropriety.
It’s also what someone who conforms to the applicable regulation does.
That regulation is 28 CFR 45.2, and it says that Justice Department employees cannot participate in a “criminal investigation or prosecution if he has a personal or political relationship with …Any person or organization substantially involved in the conduct that is the subject of the investigation or prosecution.”
I hope this is merely the appearance of impropriety, though that is enough to trigger the regulation, and that this isn’t just another Deep State scam designed to subjugate forever the half of the country that, in desperation, sent Donald Trump to Washington to try and break the establishment’s death grip on power. Because if this is a scam, we’re going to know it, and if they try to cancel out our votes what follows is going to make my recent novel’s dystopian vision of America torn apart look like Happy Bunny Meets Fluffy Puppy at the Hugging Factory.
Mueller’s simply got to go, because there’s simply no way they can satisfactorily answer the question, “Why should we trust Robert Mueller?”
I don’t know him. You probably don’t know him. All we know is he was a heroic Marine, which is a plus, and which is frankly my only source of hope that he’s not just another loathsome establishment tapeworm.
But he is also a Washington insider, one who just happens to be besties with the guy his crew of freaking Democrat donors would be fitting for an orange jumpsuit if this wasn’t just another establishment okey doke.
Worst of all, the media hacks and politicians tell us we have to trust him. That’s pretty close to case closed right there.
Here’s the conundrum. If Mueller is honest, he quits because of his massive conflict of interest, and we lose an honest investigator. And if he doesn’t quit, we know the fix is in.

Trump's Tweet Is Right: The Obstruction Of Justice Story Is Phony

June 20, 2017

Let’s Not Get Carried Away
By David Brooks
I was the op-ed editor at The Wall Street Journal at the peak of the Whitewater scandal. We ran a series of investigative pieces “raising serious questions” (as we say in the scandal business) about the nefarious things the Clintons were thought to have done back in Arkansas.
Now I confess I couldn’t follow all the actual allegations made in those essays. They were six jungles deep in the weeds. But I do remember the intense atmosphere that the scandal created. A series of bombshell revelations came out in the media, which seemed monumental at the time. A special prosecutor was appointed and indictments were expected. Speculation became the national sport.
In retrospect Whitewater seems overblown. And yet it has to be confessed that, at least so far, the Whitewater scandal was far more substantive than the Russia-collusion scandal now gripping Washington.
But as the Trump-Russia story has evolved, it is striking how little evidence there is that any underlying crime occurred — that there was any actual collusion between the Donald Trump campaign and the Russians. Everything seems to be leaking out of this administration, but so far the leaks about actual collusion are meager
In the politics of scandal, at least since Watergate, you don’t have to engage in persuasion or even talk about issues. Political victories are won when you destroy your political opponents by catching them in some wrongdoing. You get seduced by the delightful possibility that your opponent will be eliminated. Politics is simply about moral superiority and personal destruction.
The politics of scandal is delightful for cable news. It’s hard to build ratings arguing about health insurance legislation. But it’s easy to build ratings if you are a glorified Court TV, if each whiff of scandal smoke generates hours of “Breaking News” intensity and a deluge of speculation from good-looking former prosecutors.
The politics is great for those forces responsible for the lawyerization of American life. It takes power out of the hands of voters and elected officials and puts power in the hands of prosecutors and defense attorneys.
The politics of scandal drives a wedge through society. Political elites get swept up in the scandals. Most voters don’t really care.
On June 15 [Trump] tweeted, “They made up a phony collusion with the Russians story, found zero proof, so now they go for obstruction of justice on the phony story.”
Unless there is some new revelation, that may turn out to be pretty accurate commentary.
To read more, click here.