MUELLER WITCH HUNT/RUSSIA COLLUSION: An analysis of Robert Mueller and his motivations.

/in , , , , , /by

Let us start with the qualifications, or lack thereof, of Robert Mueller to be a special prosecutor investigating the alleged “collusion with Russia” by one Donald J. Trump.

We will progress from there to the real collusion with Russian elements engaged in by our own CIA in an attempt to interfere in the U.S. presidential elections of 2016.

How about Uranium One?  Think it was just Hillary Clinton who was involved?  Nine members of the Obama administration, including Eric Holder, and former FBI director Robert Mueller (in the CFIUS committee) voted in favor of allowing the Russians to control 20% of America’s Uranium.  I always said, wouldn’t you just love to see the bank accounts of those nine people during the time surrounding that event?  Do you really believe that the Clinton’s kept all of the $145 million dollars the Russians paid them?

According to Wikileaks, in 2009 Sec. State. Clinton commissioned FBI director Mueller to deliver a 10-gram sample of enriched (weapons grade) Uranium to Russian intelligence.  The transfer was made during a Tarmac meeting in Moscow in the fall of 2009 (Love those Tarmac meetings).   Clinton apologists have insisted that this transfer of Uranium had nothing to do with the Uranium One deal, or with Clinton’s role in the CFIUS deal.

As a former intelligence officer myself, I find it strange that the FBI director would be tasked with a job that one would expect should have been handled by either the CIA or the Department of Energy.  The CIA at that time was headed by Bush holdover Gates, a straight shooter, which might explain why Clinton turned to Mueller, a long-time deep state swamp critter with an extensive history of shady deals.

When Russian bribery efforts in the Uranium One case came to light, guess who Mueller put in charge of the investigation?  Fellow deep state swamp critter Rod Rosenstein, the physical and ideological clone of Nazi Deep State operative Heinrich Himmler (don’t believer me?  Google the photos).  Mueller and Rosenstein then suppressed knowledge of the Russian bribery case.

But it now appears that 2012 was the banner year for Mueller and company to engage in criminal and treasonous activities.   Remember the HSBC bank case where said bank was accused of (and admitted to) engaging in money-laundering activities for Drug cartels and terrorist groups?   Guess who was a member of the HSBC board of directors during the time these crimes were committed?  Mr. purer-than-driven-snow James Comey.  HSBC was let off the hook by the payment of a fine.  Guess who handled the case?  US Attorney for the Eastern District of New York Loretta Lynch, who was then rewarded by Obama with the post of U.S. Attorney General replacing Eric Holder, who was AG at the time of the Russian bribery scandal and this HSBC scandal.  Does the swamp take care of its own?

The above can be found in Jerome Corsi’s new book “Killing the Deep State,” as well as a variety of other sources.

But now for the treason.  Former Air Force intelligence officer Stephen Coughlin in his book Catastrphic Failure:  Blindfolding America in the Face of Jihad documented that in February of 2012 both Robert Mueller and John Brennan colluded and collaborated with elements from the Muslim Brotherhood to rid America’s intelligence and law enforcement entities of valuable data bases, books, and training manuals connected with the war on terror (p. 379).  Former DHS officer Phil Haney speaks of the same thing in his book See Something, Say Nothing:  A Homeland Security Officer Exposes the Government’s Submission to Jihad, p. 141).   But neither Haney nor Coughlin connected all the dots, linking these acts to treason.  So I will do it here:

In 1991 the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) produced a document titled:  An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America.

This document, in Arabic, was obtained by the FBI in a raid on a safe house in Northern Virginia, in 2004.  It was later used in the Holy Land Foundation trial of 2008 when Muslim Brotherhood elements connected with CAIR were found guilty of supporting terrorism.  I have in my hands a copy of the original 1991 Arabic, and a copy of the English translation used in the 2008 Holy Land trial.

This so-called “memorandum” is more like a “manifesto,” it is essentially a declaration of war on the United States and Canada.  It does not shy away from using the term “Civilizational Jihad.”

A key passage on page 4 of the Arabic original of this long, multi-page document calls on MB brothers and sympathizers in America to destroy and uproot our civil society and civilization, so it can be replaced by Shari’a law.

Egypt’s state-sponsored al-ahram newspaper on 30 August 2016 also carried a long multi-page essay on this same MB document, reaching the same conclusion as above, e.g. that the goal of the MB was to destroy the civil society and civilization of America and replace it with Shari’a law.  Civilizational jihad.

In other words, in this document the MB essentially declares war on our constitution.  So, now to connect the dots, Both Mueller and Brennan not only violated their oaths of office (to defend and protect the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic) by collaborating and colluding with a declared enemy of the United States and its constitution, but also aided and abetted that same enemy by obeying that enemy’s command to destroy Counter Terrorism training materials and data bases.  And, that, folks, is the definition of treason:  Article III, section 3.

Russia, though a competitor and an irritant, is not an openly declared enemy of the U.S., therefore collusion with it is not a crime.  However the MB is a declared enemy, therefore   aiding and abetting it is a crime . . . the crime being treason.   Now, does anybody out there seriously believe that Mueller and Brennan deleted all of these data bases and burned and shredded all of these books and training manuals in every intelligence and law enforcement agency down to the local cops . . . without Obama’s knowledge and approval?

In May of 2012 the Obama administration also issued “hands off” orders to US Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers, and US Customs and Border Protection officers pertaining to Muslims of all strips–even radicals.  So, this “hands off” policy imposed by the Obama administration allowed Muslim Brotherhood leaders and others with Islamic supremacist beliefs and affiliations to travel freely in and out of the United States (Haney, p. 132).

So, in other words, we have not only Brennan and Mueller committing treason, but also Obama.  So, what were the results of their treason?

After all these CT data bases were deleted, and executive orders given, allowing terrorist to roam freely in our country, the following terrorist acts were committed between  2013 to 2016:

Boston Marathon Bombing, Tennessee Military Recruiting Stations, Oregon Junior College, San Bernadino, and Orlando.  The toll:  82 Americans killed, and 353 Americans wounded on American soil.  No one has been held accountable.

(There is more than enough evidence here for the injured survivors and the families of those killed by these terrorist acts to launch very successful class action lawsuits against Mueller, Brennan, and Obama.  All three of these men should spend the rest of their lives in Ft. Leavenworth for the damage they have done to the United States–a damage that has long outlived their years of “service” in the government.)

The Russians even gave us direct warnings about the Tsarnaev brothers (Boston), and about the Oregon shooter.  Obama gave orders to ignore Russian warnings because “Russia is not valid at this time.”  (Translation:  Obama was peeved at Putin).

NOW FOR THE RUSSIA/TRUMP DOSSIER

While Sean Hannity and others screech about a tiny mouse in the room (the Dems paying Fusion GPS $12 million for dirt on Trump), they totally ignore the 20-ton elephant that takes up 99% of that same room.

In the first place, we don’t know how much, if any, of that $12 million GPS received from the Democrats were paid to Christopher Steele.  Certainly GPS would have wanted to keep some (or all) of it for themselves.  And, even if Steele received some of it, we would have no evidence he paid even a dime to unknown Russians for the production of the salacious material in the dossier.  No, we’re talking about much bigger fish than the Democrat’s $12 million dollars.

Ever wonder why John Brennan has been so strident, almost psychotic, about demonizing Trump publicly in tweets and on TV?  Check this out:

London-based EYE SPY  magazine, which is close to Britain’s MI6 organization,  reported (April 2017 issue, pp. 20-22) on two Russian cyber Geeks whom their employer, Russia’s FSB spy organization, had arrested for “violating their oaths of office and collaborating with a foreign intelligence agency” (Later identified as the CIA).

These two cyber geeks were apparently the ones who put together much of the salacious (and probably doctored) material (videos, audio tapes, and other “hacked materials”) which were used in the Steele dossier.

The equivalent of $14.1 U.S. dollars was found by the FSB in the residence of Dimitri Dukuchayev, one of the cyber Geeks, a major in the FSB.  The Russians swear that the money came from the CIA.  It can be assumed that the other geek, Sergei Mikailov, a  Col. in the FSB, must have received at least that much himself.  Plus, they used at least one middle man, an ex KGB general named Oleg Erovenkin (who was chief of staff to an oligarch close to Putin), to get the materials to Steele (and/or the CIA).

So, we are talking probably dozens of millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars paid by Brennan’s CIA to Russian operatives to produce materials that (Brennan hoped) could be used to interfere in the U.S. presidential elections of 2016 and/or bring Trump down were he to actually win the election.

Ever wonder why, if the whole purpose of the Mueller investigation was “Russia collusion” based on the Trump/Steele dossier . . . ever wonder why Mueller and his merry gang of over a baker’s dozen Trump haters have never raised a finger to actually investigate . . . what their whole premise is base upon–the Dossier?

As a footnote, the alleged Middle Man Erovenkin (surprise, surprise) turned up dead (slumped over in the back seat of his car) before the FSB could question him.  Though the hospital he was taken to pronounced the cause of death, a heart attack, just about everyone in Russia suspects foul play.  Foul play . . . but by whom?

The timeline of this is interesting:  The existence of the Dossier was made public to the media in October 2016–but only after Brennan personally gave DNI James Clapper the okay to release it to CNN.  Two months later, in December, middle man Erovenkin is taken out before he can be questioned.  Then, one month after that (after FSB officials had combed Erovenkin’s computers, phone data, etc. for contacts) the FSB arrested the two above-mentioned cyber geeks in January of 2017.

And, so, these are the clowns (Mueller, Comey, Rosenstein, and Brennan) who have spearheaded the plot to: 1.  Clear Hillary Clinton, and 2. To bring down Trump.

And we’re supposed to assume, as Trey Gowdy said, that everything is being handled correctly, that the FBI did exactly as the American people would want them to?

(Several news sites on the net are now reporting that FSB Col. Sergei Mikailov has been sentenced to 20 years in prison by a Russian court.  His partner, Dimitri Dukuchayev is awaiting trial.  Dukuchayev, I believe, was the ringer leader of this scandal from the Russian side.)

MUELLER PLAYS DEFENSE

There is an old adage I think that came from football:  The best defense is a good offense.

If you have a ball-hogging offense that can eat up the clock and score lots of point, you won’t need much of a defense because the other team won’t have the ball in their hands with enough time to score any points of their own.

For the last two plus years we’ve seen the Democrats play that game, launching countless investigations into everything related to Trump.  Their game plan is to stay on offense, keep Trump (and the Republicans) on the defensive constantly so they don’t have time to launch counter investigations on such things as FISA abuse and who really paid for the Dossier.

And, of course, Robert Mueller was a large part of the Democrat game plan.  He knew at least 19 months before he issued his report (if not from the moment he was brought on board) that the Dossier was false, the FISA warrants were illegal, and there was no collusion between Trump and Russia.  And, yet, knowing all of that, Mueller persisted in perpetuating a $35,000,000 fraud against the American people.  Why?

SEMPER FIE FI FO FUM

Apologists for Mueller always point to the fact that Mueller was a marine.  He served in Vietnam, was wounded, and honored with a medal.  Well, Adolph Hitler also served his country in wartime, was wounded during WWI, received a medal.  Then went on to “public service” where he was responsible for the deaths of tens of millions of people.

The only qualities of the Marine Corp that Mueller has retained, is his dogged persistence.  Put him on a case as a prosecutor, and he will get a conviction.  It does not matter whether his target is innocent or guilty, he will get that conviction.  Another notch on his gun handle.  No boy scout he.

Which is why the Democrats and the Deep State were overjoyed to see Mueller picked as special prosecutor–and why fellow swamp critter Rod Rosenstein hand-picked his old fellow traveler to do the dirty.

Mueller’s job was not to prove Russian collusion, because the only collusion was by the Democrats and Mueller’s buddies in the Deep State.  No, Mueller’s job, pure and simple, was to destroy Trump.  So, knowing that there was no Trump/Russia he perpetuated the fraud for as long as he could hoping that Trump would slip up, say something that  Mueller could use as a secondary charge.  A face-to-face interview would have served that purpose had Trump fallen for it.

Mueller has a long history of getting people to admit to crimes they didn’t commit just so he could get a prosecution.  And, he has a long history of destroying the lives of innocent people and their families . . . in his quest for yet another knotch on his tainted pistol handle.  Dirty cop, he.

(Remember the anthrax scandal where Mueller’s false accusations and pursuit ended up costing the U.S. taxpayers millions).

Thankfully, Trump didn’t fall for the face-to-face with pit viper Mueller, but Trump being Trump, there was always the chance that he’d say something, or tweet something that Mueller could use as a secondary charge of “obstruction” or something.

And, Mueller and his Trump-hating psychopaths dutifully recorded every one of Trump’s Trumpisms, and thinking outloud-isms.  But, in the end they couldn’t make the case.

At this point, when Mueller finally decided to give up the charade, he had a duty to make a decision not only on Trump/Russia, but on the issue of “obstruction of justice.”  Mueller’s failure to do so left the door open for the Democrats to continue playing offense.  If not Trump/Russia, then “obstruction of Justice.”  If not obstruction of justice, then it’s Trump’s relationship with Saudi Arabia, or his not being friendly enough with Qatar (to paraphrase California Representative Adam Schiff, and New Jersey senator Robert Menendez).

Qatar, BTW, is one of the world’s top three state sponsors of terror, and is the primary state financier of the Muslim Brotherhood, which in turn financed numerous other subsidiary jihadi terrorist groups.  So, I do believe that Schiff’s and Menendez’s fondness for Qatar needs to be investigated.

MUELLER COLLUDES WITH DEMOCRATS

Isn’t it ironic that the Democrats are demonizing Trump for “being cozy with dictators,” and even using that allegation as a basis for additional investigations into the possibility of beginning impeachment proceedings?  This, from a basket of political bullies who cheered Trump’s predecessor for kissing up to the murderous Castro regime in Cuba, for submissively telling the then Russian president that “he’d be more flexible after the elections,” for granting Iran the right to pursue nuclear weapons in the 2030s while turning 150 Billion dollars over to them to use for terrorist purposes, and not to mention his “coziness” with Egypt’s former Muslim Brotherhood dictator Muhammad Mursi.

With this background on the Democrat’s obsession with investigating everything Trump, Mueller timed the release of his so-called testy letter to Attorney General Barr, just prior to Barr’s testimony before Congress, so as to give Congress some red meat to use on Barr.  The only motivation for that, on Mueller’s part, is to allow Congress to remain on the offensive.

And, so, then the Democrats attacked Attorney General Barr because they can’t get to Trump since there is no collusion and no obstruction of justice.

WHY MUELLER, THE DEMOCRATS, AND DEEP STATE NEED TO STAY ON OFFENSE

If the FISA applications and the Steele dossier origins and funding were ever investigated, it would bring down and possibly send to jail some of Mueller’s best friends.  Not to mention any names such as James Comey, Rod Rosenstein, and John Brennan.

But even worse than that, opening up those investigations could lead to a larger investigation including several other crimes committed during the Obama years.  These could include the Hillary Clinton e-mail scandal, and Mueller’s own treasonous actions in 2012 vis-à-vis the Muslim Brotherhood.  Investigating these scandals in turn, would lead right back to the Obama White House and could put dozens of other deep state swamp critters behind bars–including Mueller himself.

Bottom line, Mueller, and his fellow “Deep State” swamp creatures, are fighting for their lives, and will do anything to keep their opposition on the defensive–and to make the public so sick of “investigations” that launching any counter investigations against the real criminals now becomes nearly impossible.  That was the Democrat Party, Deep State objective all along, and they have been hugely successful following that strategy because they have a very corrupt national media playing ball with them.

My evaluation is that if these investigations are either not started, brushed aside, or not followed to their logical conclusions (i.e. responsibility being place on those who deserve it), then the United States is well on the way to becoming a third-rate banana republic.

(Note: Much additional information on this so-called “Spy Gate” is contained in a 65 page opus by Jeff Carlson, and posted on The Epoch Times on 28 March 2019.  This includes such morsels as Britian’s GCHQ collecting intelligence on then Candidate Trump as early as late 2015, and then transmitting that intelligence to entities in the United States.  And, an indication that Brennan had an advance knowledge of the Steele dossier a month prior to the FBI’s reaching out to Steele asking for any and all the information he had on team Trump.  This would seem to support the above-mentioned EYE SPY  Reporting on CIA payments to rogue Russian cyber geeks to compile at least a portion of the dossier.)

Mr. Attorney General William Barr, you and your Department of Justice have a lot of work cut out for you.

Trump Pardons Army LT. Michael Behenna, Convicted of Murdering Al-Qaeda Detainee

/in , , , , , /by

President Donald Trump issued a full pardon Monday to former Army First Lieutenant Michael Behenna, who served five years in prison after being convicted of murdering a suspected Al-Qaeda terrorist.

In May 2008, Behenna was questioning Ali Mansur Mohamed, a suspected terrorist who had allegedly been involved in an IED attack that killed two U.S. soldiers. The interrogation ended when Behenna fired two rounds into the terrorist — which the 1st Lt. claimed was in self-defense after Mansur lunged for his pistol.

A military court convicted Behenna of unpremeditated murder in a combat zone in 2009. The prosecution said Behenna was not acting in self-defense, but in retaliation for the deaths of his fellow soldiers, and killed Mansur while returning him to his hometown.

In a statement released Monday announcing the pardon, the White House noted that Behenna’s 25-year sentence was greatly reduced following certain concerns about the case. Behenna was released from prison on parole in 2014.

“After judgment, however, the U.S. Army’s highest appellate court noted concern about how the trial court had handled Mr. Behenna’s claim of self-defense.  Additionally, the Army Clemency and Parole Board reduced his sentence to 15 years and paroled him as soon as he was eligible in 2014—just 5 years into his sentence.”

Oklahoma Attorney General Mike Hunter has repeatedly petitioned the White House for clemency, writing to Attorney General Bill Barr last month that Behenna’s conviction was predicated on improper procedure by prosecutors.

The White House cited Hunter’s support in its announcement, adding, “while serving his sentence, Mr. Behenna was a model prisoner. In light of these facts, Mr. Behenna is entirely deserving of this Grant of Executive Clemency.”

Some of Trump’s other high-profile pardons include Scooter Libby, the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, and Joe Arpaio, the former Maricopa County, Arizona sheriff.

In March 2018, the president pardoned Kristian Saucier, a Navy sailor who served a year in prison for taking photos of classified areas of a submarine.

COLUMN BY:

Amber Athey

White House Correspondent. Follow Amber on Twitter

VIDEO: Project Veritas & Lies in the Media (James O’Keefe Full Interview)

/in , , , , , , /by

Facebook “deboosting.”

Twitter “shadow banning.”

Dave Rubin and I had a great conversation about Project Veritas’ investigations into Silicon Valley and how Veritas is working with insiders in big tech to show Americans the truth behind these media goliaths.

We spoke about the importance of moral courage and how one person — with a camera and a lot of heart — can make an enormous impact.

Please watch my interview with Dave Rubin below.  It will give you better insight into the big tech investigations we are working and how brave insiders in tech, education, media, and government can work with Project Veritas to change our culture.

EDITORS NOTE: This Project Veritas interview is republished with permission.

VIDEO: The Vortex — Enemies of Truth

/in , , , , , , , , /by

TRANSCRIPT

I’m Michael Voris coming to you from Jerusalem on our final day in the Holy Land as we wrap up production from here on our documentary on the Eucharist — and quickly, because so many have asked, you can preorder a copy of the final production by just clicking on the provided link.

It was here, in Jerusalem, about a 10-minute walk from where we are right now, that Roman Procurator Pontius Pilate asked his question of Our Lord: What is truth?

Enemies of Christ deny truth, they deny its existence as anything beyond whatever is expedient. Pilate denied it, even having truth Himself standing right in front of him.

Caiaphas denied it when he tore his robes in response to Our Lord’s truthful acclamation that He was, in fact, the Messiah and the Son of God.

And so it has gone down through the centuries even to our own day. And it doesn’t even matter what given waters the enemies of Christ may swim in — politics, media, religion — all His enemies are liars.

Which of course stands to reason because it was right over there, on the Temple Mount, where Islam’s Dome of the Rock now stands, that Our Lord brutalized the Jewish leaders for their rejection of truth in His own person.

He railed at them, naming them as offspring of the serpent and saying they were enemies of the truth because their father was the devil, who is the father of lies.

That is pretty severe language all by itself, but when coming as a judgment pronounced on you by the Son of God, it is a horrifying condemnation. Those who lie, who participate in lying to obscure or deny the truth, are the offspring of the devil.

And this isn’t just some historical or even biblical reality rooted in nostalgia or biblical scholarship. This is real today.

Consider CNN with its constant stream of fake news — meaning lies and distortions to get at Donald Trump. And that includes MSNBC, or The New York Times and so forth, the lot of them that want to get at it Him.

And why do they want to get at him? Because he represents to them — rightly or wrongly, a moral America — the head of a political grassroots movement that if successful would completely undo their liberal 1970s America which has ruled the country for nearly half a century. That vision of America was built on lies.

Roe v. Wade was built on the lie that Jane Roe, whose real name was Norma McCorvey, was gang raped by black men. Only decades later did it come out that that was a lie invented by Roe lawyer Sarah Weddington.

Weddington recently sat next to Andrew Cuomo as he signed the most wide-ranging abortion law in world history into effect earlier this year — more lies.

Joe Biden’s entire political career is built on lies — perhaps the biggest one coming to light is he is a creeper, not just friendly “Uncle Joe.”

He has manhandled so many women in public and done creepy things, like smelling their hair, that he has earned the nickname “The Handyman.”

Yet, the hypocrisy of the Left in giving him a pass because he supports child slaughter is revolting — revolting, but telling. They are willing to sacrifice some of their pretended sacred principles in order to keep abortion the sacrament they have raised it to.

So too the news media will do anything to avoid calling Islamic terrorists, Islamic terrorists — more lies.

The horror of what happened in Sri Lanka on Easter was dutifully reported by the fake news corrupt media as being the fault of “religious extremists” — oh yeah, which religion? To simply pin it on “religious” extremists, condemns all religions.

Why would the media not report the full truth of this, especially when they know it. Because it’s better for them to lie by omission if they want to keep up the pretense that Islam is the religion of peace.

They need to keep that narrative going so they can use it against Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular.

So too, those on the Left who keep yammering on and lying about man-made climate change. The climate changes. It has since creation. Man does not make the climate change.

The Left — the media, politicians, elitists and so forth — are all engaged heavily in lies because they want to bring about a new order for the world where Jesus Christ is excluded from it.

Islam is based on a lie, Freemasons lie, socialists and Marxists lie, the media lies, Democrats lie, Planned Parenthood lies, all of them enemies of Christ because He is the truth, and they reject truth and the world and civilization created in the West by His Catholic Church after the fall of the Roman Empire.

Pilate, a representative of that empire, you might say got this whole ball rolling, this denial and rejection of truth for the sake of political expediency. It happened right over there, on the Temple Mount the first time, and as we know, it wouldn’t be the last.

Those dedicated to Christ say the truth. You cannot love Christ and not also love the truth, for He is the truth. Truth is sometimes hard to hear. Dealing with its consequences is often hard to bear.

But if you want to spend eternity with truth, you better start living in correct association with Him here on earth. Call out lies. Call out falsehoods. Do it every time you encounter them.

Calling out the enemies of Christ is really, after all, only calling out their father, the devil. That’s what children of the light do. They attack the darkness.

Ending our time here in the land where Our Lord instituted the sacrament of His body and blood, for our whole crew, and Church Militant supporters who made this trip possible for the production of our documentary on the Eucharist, this is Michael Voris.

RELATED ARTICLES:

U.S. Report Blasts Vatican-China Deal

Georgia AG Opens Clerical Abuse Investigation

Nick Sandmann Sues NBC for $275 Million

EDITORS NOTE: This Church Militant video is republished with permission.

The Department of Justice’s Brazen Cesspool of Criminal Activity

/in , , , , , /by

If that body (Congress) be ignorant, reckless, and corrupt, it is because the people tolerate ignorance, recklessness and corruption. President James Garfield

Equal and exact justice to all men, of whatever persuasion, religious or political. President Thomas Jefferson at first inaugural address

Justice is the end of government. It is the end of civil society. It ever has been and ever will be pursued until it be obtained, or until liberty be lost in the pursuit. President James Madison, Federalist No. 51, February 8, 1788

The Russian collusion investigation was a coup…brought to us by those within the Obama administration and his Department of Justice (DOJ).  Indications point to Obama as the director of this insurrection. It was a conspiracy, it was criminal activity with several violations of U.S. Title 18 code; the most shocking violation of the Constitution in criminal activity in the history, not just of America, but of a western government.

Much of this rises to the level of treason, as well as sedition, as it was a clear conspiracy.  There should be indictments especially when the reality is that the collusion was on the Democratic side and the contrived dossier came from Russian intelligence. These people need to be indicted, charged, and sentenced.  If they’re not, then our Constitution is nothing more than a sham.

The Marxist movement within the DNC is in control right now.  The “regressive” goals of the Marxists fully match what the democrat left is promoting today.

Eliminating our sovereignty is one of their top goals. In order to turn this country into a globalist Marxist government, three things must be destroyed. They have to change the Constitution, especially the first and second amendments.  As Marxists, they despise and target Christianity and want it destroyed because it underlines our Constitution and faith in our Creator mentioned in the Declaration of Independence.  And, they must destroy the very founding principles of America…our culture.

All three of these goals are coming to fruition and this rises to the level of treason.

Mueller Shouldn’t Have Taken the Job

Robert Mueller should never have accepted the appointment of Special Counsel for an investigation into Russian Collusion.  He knew from the very get-go that the dossier was a pile of schmutz, yet it is never mentioned in the final Mueller report.

Victoria Toensing, of diGenova and Toensing Law Firm, stated in her recent WSJ article that, “Justice Department regulations authorize appointment of a special counsel when the attorney general ‘determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted.’”  She goes on to say that Rod Rosenstein who was then attorney general because of AG Sessions’ recusal, disregarded the criminal conduct requirement and authorized a broad and vague counterintelligence probe, directing the special counsel to investigate “any links” between the Russian government and the Trump campaign.  This was unprecedented and gave a blank check to Mueller, and his gang of Hillary supporting democrat attorneys, the right to go after anyone or anything related to President Trump.

Toensing explains in detail the changes that are needed in the regulations governing the appointment of special counsels. “The rules were written by the Clinton Justice Department in 1999 after Congress declined to renew the law providing for the appointment of independent counsels.”

Her final statement in this important article is, “Mr. Barr’s Justice Department can amend the regulations without Congress, just as Janet Reno’s department wrote the rules two decades ago.  The democrats will scream and yell, but when they control the executive branch, they’ll love the clarity.”

The weaponization of the intelligence community and other government agencies created an environment that allowed for obstruction in the investigation into Hillary Clinton and the relentless pursuit of a manufactured collusion narrative against Trump.

A willing and complicit media spread unsubstantiated leaks as facts in an effort to promote the Russia-collusion narrative.  Link

Rosenstein Retiring

Rosenstein is retiring as of May 11, 2019, and Barr has said, “Rosenstein served the Justice Department with dedication and distinction. His devotion to the Department and its professionals is unparalleled. Over the course of his distinguished government career, he has navigated many challenging situations with strength, grace, and good humor.”

Oh, Right AG Barr, the man who gave a blank check to Mueller and who allowed this improper, illegal, and unparalleled investigation of a sitting president is a devoted professional. This is the same man who protected the Clinton/Obama people, silent on her illicit emails and who signed off on FISA warrants from the bogus Trump dossier, who wanted to use the 25th amendment against the President and offered to wear a wire to record our President.

Excuse the hell out of me, but this is pure hogwash and I hope Barr knows it.

Mueller Targets

Lt. General Michael Flynn was the first of their targets for good reason and was set-up by the FBI, by Obama, Sally Yates, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok and others.  He never lied to anyone, including VP Pence who I believe was instrumental in working with the FBI to eliminate General Flynn.  Fear of Mike Flynn was of top concern.  He is an expert on China, Iran, Islam and our intelligence community and had to be dispatched. Many were involved in eliminating this brilliant veteran from helping our President.  He should be freed of this horror his family has lived through for over two years.  Please help defray the millions in legal debts by donating to the Mike Flynn defense fund whatever you can.

Paul Manafort was investigated by the DOJ in 2014 and they found his conduct not prosecutable.  But the resurrection of the evidence by Mueller’s team has destroyed him because of his four-month position as campaign manager with candidate Trump.  He spent nine months in solitary confinement because of democrat appointed judges when apparently multiple murderers, Charles Manson and Richard Speck, weren’t even put in solitary confinement.

Investigators accused Manafort of lying in court despite the fact that he denied candidate Trump’s prior knowledge of the June 9th, 2016 meeting he attended with Kushner and Donald Trump Jr. with a Russian lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya.

The same goes for Jerome Corsi and Roger Stone who have been pressured to sign a plea deal falsely attesting to being conduits to Julian Assange.  Roger also needs help with his legal defense fund.  Both he and General Flynn have lost their homes.

Democratic Disappointment

The end of the special counsel’s probe shattered the Democrat’s claim of Russian conspiracy.  Of course, we all know where the real Russian conspiracy lies, but main stream media will never divulge the truth.  Americans are more interested in the economy, illegal immigration and health care than this spurious investigation of our President.  Don’t forget that the left not only hates Trump, but they hate everyone who voted for him.

And what is in this final report is as revealing as what is not in the report…there is nothing whatsoever regarding a mention of the fraudulent and manufactured Steele dossier.

The dossier, characterized by Former FBI Director James Comey under oath as “salacious and unverified,” consisted of opposition research compiled by a former British intelligence officer and commissioned by the Hillary Clinton campaign.  This piece of garbage was created by Hillary Clinton and the DNC; and Hillary’s campaign manager was pushing the fake Russia story at the DNC convention the very same day the FBI launched the Trump/Russia investigation. Link  And yes, DNC lawyers met with the FBI on Russia allegations before the surveillance warrant.

At this point everyone should know about the involvement of Obama, Sally Yates, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Bruce and Nellie Ohr, James Baker, Bill Priestap, James Clapper, John Brennan, Susan Rice, Loretta Lynch, former Director of National Security Agency Michael Hayden, and far more, including Rod Rosenstein and Robert Mueller himself, along with his 17 democrat attorneys who went after President Trump.

Comey was the catalyst that started this when he showed the Steel dossier to the President and then leaked it to the press.  When James Comey was questioned by Congress, he answered, “I don’t know,” “I don’t recall,” and “I don’t remember” 236 times while under oath. But he remembered enough to write a book where he comes off as sanctimonious despite Amazon’s five-star promotion.

James Comey claimed that the Mueller report was deficient.  However, Comey’s statement on Hillary Clinton’s unauthorized home email server that allowed the Chinese to intercept Clinton’s server and classified documents in real time was more than deficient!

The FBI has admitted that those illicit emails from Clinton’s server were also found in the Obama White House.  Yes, Obama knew!  E.W. (Bill) Priestap, assistant director of the FBI Counterintelligence Division, made the disclosure to Judicial Watch as part of court-ordered discovery into the Clinton email issue.

Where Were Whistle Blowers

Apparently, no one in the FBI thought it crazy that former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe said “F Trump” many times in a meeting with agents.  And apparently no one in the FBI thought it absolutely insane for Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein to offer to wear a wire and record the President!  But wait, there’s more.  Strzok and Page both discussed sending a counter-intelligence officer to Mike Pence’s first transition briefing as Vice President elect.  Where’s the investigation?

VP Pence says that he was deeply offended by Strzok and Page for their talk of infiltrating his transition team.  I don’t hear him being deeply offended by what has happened to the President, to General Flynn, to Paul Manafort, to Roger Stone, to Papadopoulos, or to Jerome Corsi.  This “shadow president” wants more than anything to be the leader of the free world.  Surely the Koch brothers and Dick and Betsy DeVos will fund his campaign for President, just as they’ve funded him from the beginning of his political days.

AG Barr

Our new former Bush attorney general is being excoriated for standing by the President, when in fact, he seems to be standing by the law.  Do I trust this long-time friend of Robert Mueller?  Not yet.  I want to wait and see what he does legally.  So far, he’s been honorable, but I cannot give him credence as a man who would stand by the “rule of law” until the perpetrators of this conspiracy are brought to justice and until those who committed crimes are indicted.

The leftists are accusing AG Barr of a “coverup” and “exoneration,” but the real coverups lie with all of them and Obama’s DOJ, not to mention Robert Mueller who never investigated the dossier pack of lies.  He obviously had no interest in the coup perpetrated by the very FBI which he led from 2001-2013…the last two years under Obama who kept him past the 10-year term via Congressional approval.

Mueller avoided opening the true can of worms…the Steele dossier, and actually covered for his FBI.  He even kept Strzok on his investigation payroll for six months after the Strzok/Page emails became known.  As Kimberley Strassel said in a recent Fox interview, Mueller was to investigate Russian interference in the election, but he never looked at the fact that the fake dossier may have been disinformation from the Russian government.

Strassel asks in her WSJ article,

“How did Mr. Mueller spend two years investigating every aspect of Russian interference, cyber hacking, social media trolling, meetings with Trump officials, and not consider the possibility that the dossier was part of the Russian interference effort?”

Let’s pray that the Inspector General, Michael Horowitz and our new Attorney General William Barr actually answer the questions Mueller refused to touch!

Conclusion

Todd Starnes reports that many advanced placement students across the fruited plain will be using an American history textbook that depicts President Trump as mentally ill and his supporters as racists. The textbook, published by British owned Pearson Education, is titled, “By the People: A History of the United States.” It was first exposed by radio host Alex Clark in 2018.  Pearson promotes common core testing and corporate school-to-work education.

And all of this was brought to us by the Democratic Party’s nominee, Hillary Clinton, who stole the nomination from commie Bernie, stole debate questions, had the FBI bury evidence against her, financed a fake dossier, weaponized the FBI by spying on her opponent, outspent her opponent, and still lost to a man she called incompetent.

Why isn’t she in prison?

Yemeni Man gets Prison Time for Extortion Plot Involving a Child Bride

/in , , , , , , /by

This story has been in my queue for a couple of weeks and am finally getting to it.

What is so galling about the news is that our law enforcement has spent time and (our) money to investigate a crime and now incarcerate a man for something that has nothing to do with us.

We apparently ‘welcomed’ a Yemeni family to live in the Buffalo, NY area who brought all of their cultural/religious baggage to America (and even went ‘home’ for awhile) and we get to straighten out the mess the ‘new Americans’ created.

By the way, Yemen is one of the countries now on Trump’s so-called Muslim ban list!

I first saw this short press announcement at the U.S. Justice Department website and then looked for more news.

BUFFALO, N.Y. – U.S. Attorney James P. Kennedy, Jr. announced today that Yousef Goba, 45, of Yemen, who was convicted of making extortionate threats to harm and kidnap a minor, was sentenced to serve 41 months in prison by U.S. District Judge Lawrence J. Vilardo.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Timothy C. Lynch, who handled the case, stated that between February 2015 and April 2015, Goba contacted an individual who resided in Western New York (the victim) through both telephone and text messages. During those communications, Goba threatened to kidnap and injure the victim’s minor child. The minor child went to Yemen with her mother in September 2013. While in Yemen, the minor child, her mother, and siblings lived with Goba for a period of time. When the mother wanted to move from Goba’s residence, the defendant refused to let the minor child leave and threatened that he would have the minor child marry a Yemeni man, if money was not paid to him. On April 8, 2015, during a call recorded by the FBI, Goba demanded that the victim pay him $11,000 as well as money for other expenses for the release of the minor child.

I checked around and found this story from Buffalo News that includes additional information….

….including the fact that Goba is the brother of a Yemeni man convicted on terrorism charges right after 9/11.

Child extortion plot stretching from Lackawanna to Yemen sends man to prison

The girl’s mother, who has since divorced her husband and remarried, took the children to Yemen in September 2013 to live temporarily so the father could save money while working here. [And, we are expected to believe that?—ed]

The following summer, after spending time with the father’s family in Yemen, the mother and children moved in with Goba. When they tried to leave, the defendant allowed the mother and other children to depart, but not the girl, the prosecution maintains. [So this woman moves in with a man not her relative, but the brother of a convicted Islamic terrorist?—ed]

The government also claims Goba threatened to marry off the girl to a Yemeni national willing to pay for her, and that Goba sent the father a photo of the girl pointing to a wedding cake and a second picture of her with a ring on her finger.

In pleading to extortion, Goba said he was just trying to get the father to reimburse him for the money he spent providing for the family while they lived with him in Yemen. He was arrested in New York City in 2015 as he returned to the United States.

Goba is the brother of Lackawanna Six member Yahya Goba, but sources said there appears to be no connection between Goba’s case and his brother’s involvement with the Lackawanna Six.

More here.

Again, why not just leave Yemenis in Yemen?

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Massachusetts Doctor Charged with Paying Teen for Sex

ICE Cracking Down on “Fake Families”

Minnesota: Mohamed Noor Found Guilty in Death of Australian Woman

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission.

Texas: Five People Sentenced for Multi-million Healthcare Fraud; Nigerians Among Them

/in , , /by

As I have said on many previous occasions, I hope the Trump Administration is gathering their successful fraud-busting cases together to use as examples of what the Trump team is doing for us—finding and punishing those ripping off the US taxpayer!

At every rally he should be giving an update on how much fraud he is uncovering and busting!

The Medicaid fraud, Medicare fraud, Food stamp fraud have been doing great damage to the US Treasury and often there is a ‘new American’ component that makes it even more egregious.

We welcome immigrants and then they rip us off!

Normally we are never told if a convicted criminal is a new American, but this story has a mention at the end.

More news about how we lost $4.5 million (this time!) to Medicaid/Medicare fraud.

From KRGV TV Rio Grand Valley,

5 People Sentenced in Health Care Fraud Case

MISSION – Attorney General Ken Paxton’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit assisted the feds to convict five people in two health care fraud cases.

Five people cheated Medicaid and Medicare out of nearly $4.5 million.

“By billing Medicare and Medicaid for services never provided, these individuals and their companies diverted healthcare dollars from the most vulnerable among us and defrauded taxpayers,” Attorney General Paxton said.

The owner of A&C Medical Supply LLC in Mission pleaded guilty to health care fraud and aggravated identity theft for stealing over $900,000 from Medicaid.

Andres Aly Alvarez was sentenced Thursday to two and a half years in prison.

The unit worked together with the U.S. Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General on the case, which was prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in McAllen.

Four people with Garland-based Elder Care Home Health Services were convicted for defrauding Medicaid and Medicare of more than $3.5 million.

This includes owner Loveth Isidaehomen, the director of nursing Tutu Kudiratu Etti, co-owner Celestine Tony Okwilagwe.

All were given a prison sentence of at least five years – Okwilagwe was sentenced to nearly 16 years in prison followed by an immediate deportation to Nigeria.

The four co-conspirators were ordered to pay more than $3.5 million in restitution. [What are the odds that the money is long gone—to Africa!—ed]

Celestine Tony Okwilagwe will spend 16 years in the slammer before being deported to Nigeria.

No time for more details, but you can learn more here and here about these crooks.

By the way, some involved in the fraud were Nigerian Olympic athletes.  And, if you check out those two links you will see that some of the Nigerians were barred from participating in the Medicare/Medicaid programs and figured a way around it (until they were caught by the Trump healthcare fraud busters.)

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission.

Unions Keep Deducting Dues Without Consent, Teachers Say

/in , , , , /by

Just a few weeks before school let out last May, unexpected visitors showed up in Bethany Mendez’s classroom.

They didn’t come to discuss the nuts and bolts of education or the work the teacher was doing to assist young students with learning disabilities.

Instead, the visitors wanted to know why she was leaving the teachers union, and if she fully understood the ramifications of resigning her membership.

“This made me very angry and upset to actually have them come to my classroom during instructional time during the day,” Mendez told The Daily Signal in an interview. “I thought the meeting was regarding a student who might have to go into one of my classes. But these were union representatives who showed up in my classroom to question me as to why I was leaving the union.”

Mendez teaches elementary school students with learning disabilities in California’s Fremont Unified School District.

Since she had her own bouts with dyslexia when she was roughly the same age as her students, Mendez explains, she became motivated to become a teacher and devote herself to assisting children who require specialized instruction.

For union officials to interrupt her instructional time, Mendez thought, was inappropriate and overly intrusive.

“I struggled with dyslexia when I was little, and that was due to a vision problem,” Mendez, 35, said. “But I was able to have surgery to fix it. For a lot of these kids, it’s a brain-wiring issue and it involves how their brain interprets visual information. My goal is to help children learn and to avoid the embarrassment of not being able to read in the third and fourth grades. I’m passionate about helping kids to bridge that gap.”

“It would be fine to have a friendly conversation outside of class, but to actually have two people come to my class while I was teaching and ask these questions I thought was a little offensive,” she said. “They asked if I knew what I was doing and if I knew what I would be giving up. My answer is I think everyone should have a choice to either opt in or opt out of joining the union.”

Suit Claims Unions Circumvent High Court

Last June, in a 5-4 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down mandatory union dues and fees for public sector workers.

In their decision in Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, the justices said “agency shop” laws requiring nonunion government workers to pay union fees violate the First Amendment rights of workers who object to the political agenda of public employee unions.

In March, Mendez, joined with four other teachers to file a class-action lawsuit in federal court against the California Teachers Association and several local affiliates, alleging that the teachers unions continued to deduct dues from their paychecks in violation of the Supreme Court’s Janus ruling.

The lawsuit also names the National Education Association, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, local school districts, and local unions as defendants.

Contrary to what union officials have argued, the teachers who signed union membership cards last year did not provide the California Teachers Association or local affiliates with “affirmative consent” to deduct dues, Mariah Gondeiro, a lawyer with the Freedom Foundation who represents the suing teachers, told The Daily Signal.

“These membership forms don’t include sufficient waiver language as required under Janus,” Gondeiro said, adding:

The unions are arguing they can lock people into these contracts because they signed these forms. But they don’t tell employees that they have an option to not fund the union. They don’t tell people that they are leaving out important facts. The teachers can’t consent to something they didn’t know about, and they did not know their rights.

The Daily Signal sought comment on the lawsuit from the California Teachers Association and the National Education Association.

Frank Wells, a communications official with the California Teachers Association, responded in an email.

“This is just another lawsuit from the Freedom Foundation to continue their attack on public education and public employees,” Wells said. “Their backers have a lot of money to spend so it’s likely these and other attacks will continue. I’d follow the money. That is the real story here.”

The National Education Association did not respond to requests for comment.

The Daily Signal also sought comment on the lawsuit and specific allegations from two local unions, the Fremont Unified District Teachers Association and the Hayward Education Association, by phone and email.

Hayward union officials referred a reporter to the state union, while the Fremont local acknowledged the request for comment and said it would be forwarded to the local’s president.

The Daily Signal also asked the California Teachers Association’s Wells whether he would like to respond on behalf of the local unions. He had not commented further at publication time.

Supreme Court and ‘Affirmative Consent’

Under the high court’s Janus ruling, teachers and other public employees must offer “affirmative consent” before a union may withhold fees from their paychecks, Gondeiro said.

In his opinion for the majority, Justice Samuel Alito said automatic deduction of union fees from a nonmember’s wages without consent violates free speech rights.

Freedom Foundation, a free market think tank based in Washington state, filed an amicus brief in the Janus case asking the Supreme Court to outlaw “opt out” arrangements that put the burden on nonmembers to halt collection of union fees from their paychecks.

Public employees must make a deliberate choice to “opt in” to paying union fees, Alito said on behalf of the court majority, writing:

Neither an agency fee nor any other payment to the union may be deducted from a nonmember’s wages, nor may any other attempt be made to collect such a payment, unless the employee affirmatively consents to pay. By agreeing to pay, nonmembers are waiving their First Amendment rights, and such a waiver cannot be presumed.

The Janus ruling affects about 5 million government employees in 22 states who no longer are required either to join a union or pay related fees as a condition of employment.

Mark Janus, a child support specialist at the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services, was the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit and gave the case its name.

“The opt-in requirement is something the Freedom Foundation really advocated for before Janus was decided,” Gondeiro said, adding:

The reason why is because unions are in a powerful position, and history shows they take advantage of vulnerable workers. So we wanted to make sure that the court put the burden on these powerful entities to obtain workers’ affirmative consent. Because if we didn’t, then they would just have taken advantage of workers, which they have done in the past. What’s remarkable is that even with the burden being put on the unions, they are still trying to circumvent the law.

‘All About Janus’

“I didn’t know anything about the Janus case and didn’t know that it was a possibility,” Mendez said. “I also didn’t understand why we needed to reconfirm membership. The forms didn’t make sense to me, because the dues already came out of our paychecks. But now I see that this was all about Janus.”

Union officials eventually persuaded Mendez to sign the “membership recommitment form,” which she did on June 4, 2018, just a few days before the end of the school year and a few weeks before the high court’s Janus ruling.

She had received a text message from local union officials urging her to sign up until the last few days of school.

“I was told we needed to stand 100% together to defeat a law that would destroy unions,” Mendez said:

That’s the information I got. I’m not anti-union. I think they do some good, especially my local union. I’m pro-individual rights and pro-teacher. But what I was told was not the truth. Janus does not destroy all unions. They [union leaders] did not provide us with an opportunity for informed consent, and that’s what this case is about.

Mendez says she attempted to opt out last fall from the California Teachers Association and her local union.

But there was a catch. Because Mendez signed the membership recommitment form, union representatives informed the teacher that she was locked in until this coming June. The form contained “fine print” and “a clause” that said teachers could withdraw from membership only during a 30-day window beginning when they signed the form.

$10 Refund for Political Activity

Audrey Stewart, a fellow plaintiff who teaches in Hayward Unified School District, says she is familiar with the tactics unions use to keep dues and fees flowing in from teachers who prefer not to be members.

Stewart said she also has a hard time believing that her union spends only about $10 a year on politics.

Stewart, a teacher for 30 years, told The Daily Signal that she often has found herself in a hostile work environment because she differs with the political stance of teachers unions on a range of issues.

“I don’t want to pay for the unions’ politics,” she said. “I always said they could represent me as far as employment is concerned, but they shouldn’t have a place in my political life.”

Although unions were required to refund nonchargeable political expenditures that weren’t part of the collective bargaining process even before the Janus ruling, Stewart isn’t convinced the amount of her refunds measure up with what the unions actually spend on politics.

“They have been issuing this $5 bill to me twice a year, and I have to go down to the office of my local union and pick it up because that’s what they are claiming is the [refundable] amount spent for political purposes,” Stewart said. “So, they are saying it’s basically $10 a year they spend on politics. This is really a joke. This has been going on for 30 years, and I find it odd that it’s never increased either. It’s always a cash payment in an envelope.”

Stewart says she signed her membership recommitment form on May 9, 2018, at the behest of union officials. The form said it was necessary for her and other teachers to sign to support colleagues.

“There was no rhyme or reason to these recommitment cards,” she said. “I signed it because I was told it was to support my fellow teachers. But I later told my union representative that I found this recommitment form awfully suspicious because they front-loaded this knowing this [Janus] case was coming and it might not go in their favor, and they have locked these teachers in. I don’t even know if this recommitment form was a legal membership document.”

Gondeiro, the lawyer with Freedom Foundation, told The Daily Signal that the forms signed by teachers last year should not pass legal muster.

“What we are doing with the class-action suit is we are trying to illustrate what affirmative consent looks like,” she said, adding:

We are trying to take Janus to an extra step because apparently the unions can’t abide by the law. So, we want to put in plain text what type of notice they have to give workers, because they need all the direction they can get. We want in the contract that they have a right to not financially support the union, and [that] by signing the agreement they are waiving their First Amendment rights. If they don’t include that type of language in the contract, there is no affirmative consent.

Gondeiro also said the unions are making it difficult for teachers who have become aware of their rights to opt out, using restrictive window periods and other cumbersome requirements that involve writing letters to union representatives and payroll personnel saying they want to leave the union and stop automatic deduction of dues.

“I sent letters to the California Teachers Association and to my local telling them I was going to opt out,” Stewart said. “They wrote back to me to thank me for my inquiry. But I wasn’t inquiring, I was telling them I was leaving.”

Stewart, who teaches at both the elementary and high school levels, told The Daily Signal that “strange incidents” took place after she made it clear she wanted to leave the union.

Her elementary school classroom was “ransacked” several times after hours in February, Stewart said, and around this time she was “verbally attacked” by a union leader while walking up a path to the high school.

The lead plaintiff in the teachers’ lawsuit says she wants to make a clean break.

Mendez, who is entering her 13th year as a teacher, says she had wanted to withdraw from the California Teachers Association, but until recently was content with her local union.

“The CTA has always misrepresented me, but I was willing to stay in the local union,” she said. “But after they [the local union] withheld information, misled us, and accepted poor salary and benefits in my district, I wanted out of both the state and local union.”

The local unions and school districts named in the lawsuit include Fremont Unified District Teachers Association, Valley Center-Pauma Teachers Association, Hayward Education Association, Tustin Education Association, and the Fremont, Valley Center-Pauma, Hayward, and Tustin unified school districts.

COLUMN BY

Kevin Mooney

Kevin Mooney is an investigative reporter for The Daily Signal. Send an email to Kevin. Twitter: @KevinMooneyDC.

RELATED ARTICLES:

This Mom Is Fighting Her Kids’ School District’s LGBT Indoctrination

California Bill Would Turn College Health Centers Into Abortion Clinics

Dear Readers:

With the recent conservative victories related to tax cuts, the Supreme Court, and other major issues, it is easy to become complacent.

However, the liberal Left is not backing down. They are rallying supporters to advance their agenda, moving this nation further from the vision of our founding fathers.

If we are to continue to bring this nation back to our founding principles of limited government and fiscal conservatism, we need to come together as a group of likeminded conservatives.

This is the mission of The Heritage Foundation. We want to continue to develop and present conservative solutions to the nation’s toughest problems. And we cannot do this alone.

We are looking for a select few conservatives to become a Heritage Foundation member. With your membership, you’ll qualify for all associated benefits and you’ll help keep our nation great for future generations.

ACTIVATE YOUR MEMBERSHIP TODAY

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission.

New York Is Illegally Targeting the NRA, Trump Says

/in , , , , /by

President Donald Trump on Monday called the New York state attorney general’s newly announced probe of the National Rifle Association illegal, and an expert on laws regarding nonprofits contends that the probe is at minimum improper.

Trump said it was a concerted effort to “take down and destroy” the NRA.

“When a state attorney general uses the power vested in the attorney general’s office to improperly use [it] against organizations for political purposes, it could be illegal,” Cleta Mitchell, a Washington lawyer who advises nonprofits and was co-counsel to the NRA in a 2002 Supreme Court case, told The Daily Signal.

“The NRA, in court, would have a good predicate to argue political bias against the organization to show that hostility toward the organization’s existence,” Mitchell said.

Over the weekend, the attorney general’s office announced it commenced an investigation into the NRA’s nonprofit status and would be subpoenaing financial records.

The announcement came in the midst of turmoil in the organization, after the NRA ousted Oliver North as president in what became a public dispute between North and NRA Chief Executive Wayne LaPierre. North reportedly said he was forced out because he alleged financial improprieties.

New York state has taken separate action against the finances of Carry Guard, the NRA’s branded insurance program.

Even the liberal American Civil Liberties Union filed a brief on behalf of the NRA last year that argued New York “indisputably targeted the NRA and similar groups based on their ‘gun promotion’ advocacy.”

The ACLU brief continued: “It is important to note that, however controversial it may be, ‘gun promotion’ is core political speech, entitled to the same constitutional protection as speech advocating for reproductive rights, marijuana legalization, or financial deregulation.”

New York Attorney General Letitia James pledged as a Democratic candidate for the office to “use the constitutional power as an attorney general to regulate charities, that includes the NRA, to investigate their legitimacy,” it noted.

The new probe could be entirely legitimate, but it faces questions because of New York’s past actions, said Amy Swearer, a senior legal policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation.

“State AGs certainly have a duty to investigate credible allegations of financial misconduct by nonprofits incorporated in their states,” Swearer told The Daily Signal. “At this point, it’s unclear what evidence exists that might threaten the NRA’s nonprofit status, but this type of investigation is not in and of itself unlawful.”

She continued:

Unfortunately, as the president alluded, New York has a long history of taking actions against the NRA to silence the organization’s pro-Second Amendment voice, and even the ACLU has come to the NRA’s defense over recent unconstitutional attempts by New York to stifle the organization financially.

Because of the state’s history of taking unconstitutional and bad-faith actions against the NRA, a dark cloud of suspicion will justifiably continue to hang over what might otherwise be a justified and good-faith investigation.

The NRA is clearly working through some internal problems, and the president is right to suggest that this distracts the organization from what it does best—working to strengthen the Second Amendment against those who would rather destroy its protections.

Trump tweeted on Monday that New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and the attorney general “are illegally using the state’s legal apparatus to take down and destroy this very important organization.”

The president said the NRA “must get its act together quickly, stop the internal fighting.”

An NRA spokesman did not respond to phone and email inquiries for this article.

The New York attorney general’s office responded to the president Monday.

“Attorney General Letitia James is focused on enforcing the rule of law. In any case we pursue, we will follow the facts wherever they may lead,” the office said in a public statement. “We wish the president would share our respect for the law.”

The New York attorney general’s office has subpoenaed banks for financial records related to the Trump Organization, the president’s business, and is suing the Trump Foundation charity.

“This is the same office that has gone after the Trump Foundation,” Mitchell said. “The attorney general obviously has a pattern and practice of going after an organization it does not like.”

COLUMN BY

Fred Lucas

Fred Lucas is the White House correspondent for The Daily Signal and co-host of “The Right Side of History” podcast. Send an email to Fred. Twitter: @FredLucasWH.

Dear Readers:

With the recent conservative victories related to tax cuts, the Supreme Court, and other major issues, it is easy to become complacent.

However, the liberal Left is not backing down. They are rallying supporters to advance their agenda, moving this nation further from the vision of our founding fathers.

If we are to continue to bring this nation back to our founding principles of limited government and fiscal conservatism, we need to come together as a group of likeminded conservatives.

This is the mission of The Heritage Foundation. We want to continue to develop and present conservative solutions to the nation’s toughest problems. And we cannot do this alone.

We are looking for a select few conservatives to become a Heritage Foundation member. With your membership, you’ll qualify for all associated benefits and you’ll help keep our nation great for future generations.

ACTIVATE YOUR MEMBERSHIP TODAY

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission.

Madame Secretary, “At this point it makes a very big difference.”

/in , /by

During a January 23, 2013, Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing Hillary Clinton was questioned about the September 11, 2012 bombing of the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. The Benghazi anniversary attack occurred while Clinton was Obama’s Secretary of State during the final months of Romney’s presidential bid to unseat Obama and just two months before the November presidential elections.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee was conducting a review of the Benghazi attack that killed four Americans including U.S. Ambassador J. Chris Stevens. During questioning by Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI), Hillary Clinton famously said, “At this point what difference does it make?” Let’s find out.

The transcript of the hearing recorded on C-SPAN shows Sen. Johnson repeatedly asking Clinton about the story coming out of Obama’s White House that the Benghazi attack was a response to protests outside the Consulate and an anti-Islam video posted on YouTube.

Johnson: No, again, we were misled (5:02 on C-SPAN) that there were supposedly protests and that something sprang out of that — an assault sprang out of that — and that was easily ascertained that that was not the fact, and the American people could have known that within days and they didn’t know that.

Clinton: With all due respect (5:16 on C-SPAN tape), the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided that they’d they go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator. Now, honestly, I will do my best to answer your questions about this, but the fact is that people were trying in real time to get to the best information. The IC (intelligence community) has a process, I understand, going with the other committees to explain how these talking points came out. But you know, to be clear, it is, from my perspective, less important today looking backwards as to why these militants decided they did it than to find them and bring them to justice, and then maybe we’ll figure out what was going on in the meantime.

Johnson: OK. Thank you, Madame Secretary.

After numerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests made by Judicial Watch for documents related to the Benghazi attacks, on May 15, 2014 Judicial Watch sued the U.S. Department of State and U.S. Department of Defense for their failure to comply with FOIA requests. The judge ruled in favor of Judicial Watch and ordered that the papers be released.

On May 18, 2015 Judicial Watch published a stunning report that the Department of Defense and Department of State documents clearly showed that the Obama administration knew that Al-Qaeda terrorists had planned the Benghazi attack 10 days in advance.

So, Hillary Clinton knowingly lied to Senator Johnson on January 23, 2013 during the Senate hearings. Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Susan Rice knowingly lied repeatedly to the American public by insisting that an anti-Islam video was the cause of a spontaneous protest that turned violent and sparked the Benghazi attack. Lies. Lies. Lies.

Filmmaker Nakoula Bassely Nakoula, an Egyptian-born Coptic Christian, posted a short anti-Islam video “Innocence of Muslims” on YouTube. His video was falsely blamed for the Benghazi attack and used deceitfully by Obama and his administration to dupe the American people and hide their own culpability. Nakoula was shamed, incarcerated, and threatened with death by Obama’s White House. He now lives in a homeless shelter in California.

More lies. Wikipedia continues to disingenuously maintain that Nakoula’s film sparked the Benghazi attack. The section on “Arrest and imprisonment” begins with, “Following the violent reactions to the video . . .” The section concludes with one interesting fact verified by Reuters – that on November 28, 2012, two days before the Muslim-Brotherhood government of Obama-favored Mohamed al-Morsi was ousted, an Egyptian court sentenced Nakoula to death in absentia for defaming Islam.

That brings us to the Muslim-Brotherhood connection to the attack on Benghazi.

The stunning Judicial Watch report was published on 5.18.15 – four years ago. Its revelations were jaw-dropping then but even more relevant now as the dots connecting Obama to Hillary’s private email server and Benghazi are also connecting Obama and Hillary to the Muslim Brotherhood and the unlawful FISA warrants used to spy on Donald Trump.

From the Judicial Watch report:

“A Defense Department document from the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), dated September 12, 2012, the day after the Benghazi attack, details that the attack on the compound had been carefully planned by the BOCAR terrorist group ‘to kill as many Americans as possible.’ The document was sent to then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Obama White House National Security Council. The heavily redacted Defense Department ‘information report’ says that the attack on the Benghazi facility ‘was planned and executed by The Brigades of the Captive Omar Abdul Rahman (BOCAR).’ The group subscribes to ‘Al-Queda ideologies.'”

In this Defense Department document Abdul Baset known as AZUZ, the leader of BOCAR, is blamed for the attack on Benghazi – NOT Nakoula Bassely Nakoula.

Further, from a separate Judicial Watch lawsuit, the State Department produced a different document created the morning after the Benghazi attack by Hillary Clinton’s offices that made no mention of videos or demonstrations, “Four COM personnel were killed and three wounded in an attack by dozens of fighters on the U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi beginning approximately 1550 Eastern Time . . .”

Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch concludes:

“If the American people had known the truth – that Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and other top administration officials knew that the Benghazi attack was an al-Qaeda terrorist attack from the get-go – and yet lied and covered up this fact – Mitt Romney might very well be president. And why would the Obama administration continue to support the Muslim Brotherhood even after it knew it was tied to the Benghazi terrorist attack and to al-Qaeda? . . . These documents show that the Benghazi cover-up has continued for years and is only unraveling through our independent lawsuits. The Benghazi scandal just got a whole lot worse for Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.”

Hillary’s Benghazi lies and cover-up protected Obama’s 2012 presidential candidacy and made her Obama’s legacy candidate for 2016. Obama’s lies and cover-up protected Hillary’s presidential bid and his own political malfeasance and ideological connection to the Muslim Brotherhood. Hillary’s private email server was an off-the-books carrier of classified information that protected Hillary, Obama, Rice, and every other Obama administration official implicated in the Benghazi attack and its cover-up including the aftermath of securing FISA warrants through unverified foreign intelligence sources to spy on the the Trump campaign.

Tony Shaffer, former senior intelligence officer in the U.S. Army, explains the unprecedented corruption and shocking abuse of FISA by Obama’s FBI to spy on the Trump campaign in a stunning interview with Jan Jekielek from American Thought Leaders. Tony Shaffer describes what was done by the Obama administration but the question remains – WHY?

Journalist Joan Swirsky provides the answer. In her stunning 4.23.19 article, “Prison, anyone?” she identifies the nine words uttered by then Candidate Trump during a campaign debate that launched the shocking coup attempt against a sitting president of the United States. “If I were president, Hillary would be in jail.” These nine words are the key to everything – they unlock the Benghazi cover-up the FISA abuses, Spygate, Russiagate, the partisan Mueller investigation, and the ongoing hysterical screams by Democrats to impeach President Trump.

When the unthinkable happened and Candidate Trump was elected president, the Strok/Page insurance policy was launched to overthrow President Trump because if Hillary goes to jail so does Obama and his collaborators – the entire house of cards collapses and the enormity of the coup attempt against sitting President Trump is explained and exposed.

Madame Secretary, “At this point it makes a very big difference.”

EDITORS NOTE: This Goudsmit Pundicity column is republished with permission.

Trump Just Ditched a UN Arms Treaty, and He Was Right to Do It

/in , , , , , /by

On Friday, at the annual meeting of the National Rifle Association, President Donald Trump announced that he was un-signing the Arms Trade Treaty. As he put it, “The United Nations will soon receive a formal notice that America is rejecting this treaty.”

He then pulled out a pen and, in front of the entire audience, signed a message asking the Senate to end its consideration of the treaty.

I have followed the Arms Trade Treaty closely since 2009, before the formal negotiations for it even began. The treaty purports to require nations to regulate the conventional arms trade. President Barack Obama signed it in 2013, but the U.S. never ratified it.

I have no doubt that the president has made the correct decision—and no doubt that he will be hammered for it by the progressive left, who loves to praise the treaty as much as it enjoys blaming the United States.

If you would like to read my argument against the treaty, it’s here. More importantly, the White House has released a short statement explaining the president’s decision. It is a model of clarity and accuracy. I doubt that the treaty’s friends will have any time for it, but that is their loss. I would love to see them try to rebut it.

A few points about the White House’s statement:

  1. It notes that the Arms Trade Treaty is “being opened for amendment in 2020 and there are potential proposals that the United States cannot support.” That is correct. The main such proposal was floated last summer at another U.N. gathering on conventional arms. It involves bringing ammunition fully into the Arms Trade Treaty, meaning that the U.S. would have to track or trace the billions of bullets that are sold internationally. The U.S. opposed this last summer because it is utterly impractical.
  2. The White House states that the treaty provides “a platform for those who would seek to constrain our ability to sell arms to our allies and partners.” That is true. Virtually every activist supporting the Arms Trade Treaty proclaims, at the top of their lungs, that it is about stopping U.S. arms sales.
  3. It points out that the treaty has “a track record of … being used by groups to try and overturn sovereign national decisions on arms exports.” That is quite right. The statement notes that the British government—which, idiotically, led the push for the Arms Trade Treaty—has gotten its just desserts by being repeatedly sued by activists in the name of the treaty.
  4. In its only mention of the Second Amendment, the White House states that, by un-signing, the president has ensured that the treaty “will not become a platform to threaten Americans’ Second Amendment rights.” The treaty’s supporters love to argue that it has nothing to do with curbing the Second Amendment. What they don’t mention is that many opponents of the treaty—myself included—urged them privately to make that clear in the treaty text. They refused to do so. The treaty is not a gun grab, but it is precisely what the White House says it is: a platform that gun control activists could potentially do great damage with.
  5. Finally, the White House notes that major arms exporters like Russia and China are not in the Arms Trade Treaty, and that “[t]he [treaty] cannot achieve its chief objective of addressing irresponsible arms transfers if these major arms exporters are not subject to it at all.” That is precisely what the Obama administration said as far back as 2010. It is also indisputably true.

I could not have written the White House’s statement any better. It is a slam dunk. I commend the White House for its decision, and for explaining it effectively and correctly.

This is not the end of the story of the Arms Trade Treaty. It still has 101 state parties around the world. The U.S. needs to follow up this decision to un-sign by pulling all U.S. funding from the treaty. And there are other bad treaties and institutions of the same type as the Arms Trade Treaty. We should quit them, too.

Most fundamentally, while it’s excellent to quit bad treaties, it’s even better not to let them get made in the first place. Far too often, the U.S. finds itself in the position of a hockey goaltender, who just has to stand there and stop shots. If you just let the other guy keep shooting, sooner or later you’re going to get scored on.

We need to take hold of the puck, skate down the ice, and put some pressure on the other side.

But first things first. The White House has made the right call on the Arms Trade Treaty, and it’s made the right call for the right reasons.

COMMENTARY BY

Ted Bromund

Ted R. Bromund, Ph.D., is the Margaret Thatcher senior research fellow at The Heritage Foundation. Read his research. Twitter: .

Dear Readers:

With the recent conservative victories related to tax cuts, the Supreme Court, and other major issues, it is easy to become complacent.

However, the liberal Left is not backing down. They are rallying supporters to advance their agenda, moving this nation further from the vision of our founding fathers.

If we are to continue to bring this nation back to our founding principles of limited government and fiscal conservatism, we need to come together as a group of likeminded conservatives.

This is the mission of The Heritage Foundation. We want to continue to develop and present conservative solutions to the nation’s toughest problems. And we cannot do this alone.

We are looking for a select few conservatives to become a Heritage Foundation member. With your membership, you’ll qualify for all associated benefits and you’ll help keep our nation great for future generations.

ACTIVATE YOUR MEMBERSHIP TODAY

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission.

VIDEO: Trump Jokes to NRA, I Didn’t Need a Gun to Stop Attempted ‘Coup’ Against My Presidency

/in , , , , , , , /by

President Donald Trump joked during the National Rifle Association (NRA) annual meeting on Friday that he doesn’t need a gun to stop the attempted “coup” against his presidency.

“Every day of my administration we are taking power out of Washington, D.C., and returning it to the American people — where it belongs. And you see it now better than ever with all of the resignations of bad apples,” the president said.

“They tried for a coup, didn’t work out so well,” he added, presumably referring to the investigation into alleged Russia collusion and the FBI’s attempts to spy on his campaign.

WATCH: 

As the crowd of NRA members cheered, Trump slipped in a joke: “And I didn’t need a gun for that one, did I?”

The audience responded with laughter.

“We’re looking at things you wouldn’t believe possible in our country: corruption at the highest level,” Trump continued. “A disgrace. Spying, surveillance, trying for an overthrow. And we caught ’em. We caught ’em.’

Trump told Fox News’ Sean Hannity on Thursday night that he plans to declassify scores of FBI documents related to the Russia probe, including FISA warrant applications against Carter Page and pages of notes of interviews with Bruce Ohr.

COLUMN BY

Amber Athey

White House Correspondent. Follow Amber on Twitter

RELATED ARTICLE: Barr: ‘I Think Spying Did Occur’ Against Trump Campaign

VIDEO: Sanders & Harris Endorse Boston Marathon murderer be allowed to vote while in prison

/in , , , , , /by

Boston Marathon jihad murderer Dzhokhar Tsarnaev showed the “opposite of remorse” when he was captured.

He had the black flag of jihad on his wall and posed for a picture with one finger raised — the sign that the Islamic State and other jihad groups use to signify the absolute Islamic monotheism for which they are doing violence.

Whose interests would his vote serve? Not those of Americans.

“Sanders & Harris Think Boston Marathon Bomber Should Be Allowed to Vote While in Prison,” by Corwin Parks, MRC TV, April 23, 2019.

RELATED VIDEO: Bernie Says Incarcerated Felons Should Have Right To Vote.

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column with video is republished with permission.

This Supreme Court Case Threatens the Left’s View of Group Identity, Victimhood

/in , , , , , , , /by

Oral arguments heard at the Supreme Court Tuesday were ostensibly about whether the 2020 census could include a question about citizenship.

But don’t be fooled. The reason this case rocketed to the Supreme Court and has been so hotly contested is that the debate hinges, at bottom, on two starkly different visions of America.

In one vision, what matters is loyalty to and affiliation with a nation-state that is self-contained, independent, civic, and colorbind. In the other vision, priority is given to one’s membership in a subnational group that is based on subjective self-identity (like race or sexual orientation), and association with that group yields benefits and preferences in everything, from hiring to contracting, employment, housing, and even electoral redistricting.

The divide essentially comes down to a commitment to America as a nation vs. a commitment to one’s subgroup and the hierarchy of victimhood.

This is one of the great debates of our time—not just here, but around the world.

Whatever the Supreme Court decides—and an opinion is needed by summer if the Census Bureau is to meet its deadline of printing millions of forms—rest assured that this debate will not go away any time soon.

To paraphrase Mark Twain, reports of the death of the nation-state seem to have been greatly exaggerated. Despite pressure from above—from sovereignty-draining, transnational institutions like the United Nations and the European Union—and from below, i.e., from identity groups based on race, sex, ethnicity, sexual orientation, disability status, and anything else that can confer conceptual victimhood (and thus special rights) on an individual, the nation-state has shown remarkable resilience.

Defenders of the nation-state remind us that democracy, the rule of law, self-determination, liberty, and everything else Americans and like-minded people hold dear depend on territorially and culturally defined nation-states. Its opponents like to portray the nation-state as archaic, unnecessary, and a gateway to authoritarianism, if not worse.

The Trump administration has championed the sovereignist view, and in 2017 recognized the importance of citizenship by requesting that a question on citizenship be added to the 2020 census.

Progressive groups have left no stone unturned in their bid to frustrate the administration on this front. Notably, these same groups defend a panoply of other census questions that divide Americans by sex, ethnicity, and race.

These groups argue that the citizenship question would depress responses among certain marginalized groups, especially Hispanics. Yet the Census Bureau says it has no credible evidence that the question would affect the quality of the data.

Dozens of progressive organizations brought suit in New York, joined by 18 states and the District of Columbia. They won in district court in New York, thus the case Tuesday was Department of Commerce v. New York.

The hearing Tuesday did not in the least devote itself to these large questions of nationhood, sovereignty, and the like. Instead, there was a lot of technical and statistical back-and-forth between liberal justices and United States Solicitor General Noel Francisco, who represented the administration, and between the conservative justices and New York Solicitor General Barbara Underwood; Dale Ho, the lawyer for the New York plaintiffs; and Douglas Letter, the lawyer who represented the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives. All of these latter individuals argued against including the citizenship question.

It is difficult, as usual, to predict which way a court will go. Ho did his side no favors by admitting at one point that, yes, the Trump administration is right that citizenship data is needed to enforce the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

At issue is the fact that the Voting Rights Act does indeed call, in some places, for drawing districts where at least 50 percent of the voting population are members of a racial or ethnic minority.

Ho, perhaps unwittingly, made the case that “if the minority group has relatively low citizenship rates, for example, as is the case with Hispanic populations in some circumstances, then you need citizenship data to make sure that you’re drawing a district in which minority voters are, in fact, a majority of the population.”

That data is now provided by the American Community Survey, a smaller census product that goes out to fewer households. But some states, ironically including some of those suing the Trump administration, have complained that that data is not reliable.

Justice Neil Gorsuch thus jumped on Ho’s argument and pointed out that “some of the states who are now respondents before us have in litigation, including in this court, argued that [American Community Survey] data should not be relied upon for purposes of citizenship or other purposes, that the census data is more accurate. What do we do about that? It seems to me like you kind of put the government in a bit of a catch 22.”

It is the unified left that is in a catch 22, however—and the Voting Rights Act, as it is currently interpreted, put it there. The left does not mind (it in fact loves) the racial gerrymandering that is aided by census questions on ethnicity, race, and so forth. But because what is actually needed is voters, the administration can now say it needs citizenship data, since only citizens are allowed to vote.

The left is terrified by this prospect. It now realizes that available citizenship data will allow jurisdictions to apportion and redistrict seats according to voter, or citizen population, not total population, as they are constitutionally entitled to do. That would, for example, prevent liberal districts from swelling their numbers by adding populations of non-voting noncitizens or even illegal immigrants.

This essentially means citizenship data on the American nation itself—not arbitrary subgroups—would determine the shape of the House of Representatives, and the number and composition of electoral votes at election time. Our elections would more accurately represent the America that really exists, not the faux America envisioned by intersectional activists.

To win this issue, not just in the Supreme Court, but in the all-important court of public opinion, those who believe in the nation-state must constantly make the case that its view of the nation is nonracial, but instead is truly inclusive and colorblind. We must show that the other vision leads to balkanization, conflict, and ultimately, national splintering.

COMMENTARY BY

Mike Gonzalez

Mike Gonzalez, a senior fellow at The Heritage Foundation, is a widely experienced international correspondent, commentator, and editor who has reported from Asia, Europe, and Latin America. He served in the George W. Bush administration, first at the Securities and Exchange Commission and then at the State Department, and is the author of “A Race for the Future: How Conservatives Can Break the Liberal Monopoly on Hispanic Americans.”Read his research. Twitter: .

Dear Readers:

With the recent conservative victories related to tax cuts, the Supreme Court, and other major issues, it is easy to become complacent.

However, the liberal Left is not backing down. They are rallying supporters to advance their agenda, moving this nation further from the vision of our founding fathers.

If we are to continue to bring this nation back to our founding principles of limited government and fiscal conservatism, we need to come together as a group of likeminded conservatives.

This is the mission of The Heritage Foundation. We want to continue to develop and present conservative solutions to the nation’s toughest problems. And we cannot do this alone.

We are looking for a select few conservatives to become a Heritage Foundation member. With your membership, you’ll qualify for all associated benefits and you’ll help keep our nation great for future generations.

ACTIVATE YOUR MEMBERSHIP TODAY

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission.

Why AG Barr Must Confront the Deep State

/in , , , /by

Due to her amazing job taking care of our home, 9 birds, 2 cats, one greyhound and me, my wife Mary has not followed the intricate details of the Mueller/deep state silent coup to end Trump’s presidency.

Mary asked, “Is Mueller a good guy or a bad guy?”

To prevent her eyes from glazing over, I kept it simple. Mueller is a bad guy. He could have concluded in two weeks that Trump did not collude with Russia to steal the presidential election from Hillary Clinton. And yet, Mueller dragged out his bogus investigation for over two years which dramatically harmed Trump’s approval numbers and even may have caused Republicans to lose the house.

Then, Mary asked, “Why won’t AG William Barr comply with Democrats’ demand that he release the Mueller report unredacted?”

I explained, redacted means taking a marker and blacking out information unrelated to the investigation. During the course of an FBI investigation, personal information about your life will surface. It is unfair and illegal to go public with your personal information if it has nothing to do with the charges against you.

Therefore, Barr would be breaking the law if he released the Mueller report unredacted. Embarrassing dirt was exposed during the Bill Clinton sex sandals investigation. Democrats wanted to make sure such details would not be made public again. They passed a law that future investigations must be redacted. Now, Democrats are demanding that Barr break their own law.

Fake news media and Democrats know the law prevents Barr from releasing the unredacted Mueller report. And yet, Democrats are absurdly viciously attacking and seeking to destroy Barr, flooding the airwaves with their lies that Barr is illegally protecting Trump. Democrats know they can lie to the American people about Barr because fake news media will cover for them.

The Mueller report found no evidence of Trump collusion with Russia. And yet, Democrats, the deep state and fake news media intend to continue promoting their lie that Trump colluded and obstructed justice all the way to the 2020 presidential election.

Exposing their repulsive arrogance and sense of superiority, John Brennan, James Clapper, Adam Schiff, James Comey and Obama minions are moving full speed ahead with their treasonous quest to remove Trump from office. These evil people are using fake news media to sell their lie that Trump is guilty of obstruction for simply confronting their lie-filled attempts to over-through his presidency. They expected Trump to behave like a typical wimpy passive Republican and allow them to destroy him.

AG William Barr must follow through with holding them accountable to save Trump’s presidency and the rule of law in America. The only thing that is going to stop the deep state’s Terminator cyborg focus on removing Trump from the White House is a powerful political punch in the face by Barr.

Bullies are cowards. As a black kid growing up in the mean projects of Baltimore, bullies took my lunch money. Cousin Jimmy confronted them with a threat of personal destruction if they dared to bother me again. They complied. Cousin Jimmy also taught me the power and wisdom of having a strong military. Washington DC is full of cowardly bullies, hellbent on undermining the will and best interest of the American people.

These bad players in the deep state have no fear of punishment for their treason. Barr must push them back on their heels, forcing them to go on defense.

When Barr probes deep into the deep state’s outrageous, unprecedented and illegal attempt to reverse the 2016 election, all the cockroaches will run, exposed by the light of truth and justice. That will be a glorious thing to see; a great day for America.