America’s Vast Fascistic Media Ignore Dem Crimes and Misdemeanors!!

He who must not be named: How Hunter Biden became a conversation-stopper

BY JONATHAN TURLEY, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR at the Hill:

.

Hunter Biden: The mere mention of his name seemingly triggers the vapors among cable TV hosts and their guests.

When President Trump turned to the Bidens and Ukraine in a speech, MSNBC host Nicolle Wallace cut off the coverage, declaring she had to protect the listeners: “We hate to do this, really, but the president isn’t telling the truth.” When Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) tried to answer a question about the Ukraine scandal by referencing the Bidens, “Meet the Press” host Chuck Todd angrily told him not to “gaslight” the nation.

The Bidens, simply, are not what well-bred people discuss in polite company, apparently. Indeed, many journalists seem to be channeling not Edward R. Murrow, the fabled CBS newscaster, but Florence Hartley, the author of “The Ladies’ Book of Etiquette, and Manual of Politeness” in 1872. Hartley warned her readers to “avoid, at all times, mentioning subjects or incidents that can in any way disgust your hearers.”

For news shows on MSNBC, CNN and other cable networks, nothing is more disgusting than the mention of what Hunter Biden actually was doing in Ukraine.

For those brave enough to read on, I wish to dispense with one threshold issue: I was critical of claims over the last three years of “proven” crimes and impeachable offenses in the Russia investigation. However, the first day that Trump’s Ukraine call was disclosed, I stated that — if a quid pro quo were proved — the alleged self-dealing with military aid would be an impeachable offense. My point: Raising concerns over Hunter Biden does not mean you are excusing Trump’s actions.

What is most remarkable about the paucity of coverage of Hunter Biden’s dealings is the conclusory mantra that “this has all been investigated.” Many TV hosts prefer to focus on President Trump’s dubious claim that former Vice President Joe Biden forced the firing of Ukraine’s chief prosecutor to protect his son. I, too, fail to see compelling evidence to support Trump’s charge.

There is, however, that other problem of Hunter Biden landing a windfall contract with one of Ukraine’s most corrupt figures after his father took charge of potentially billions in U.S. loans and aid for Ukraine. That is what no one seems to want to discuss.

Indeed, the Biden campaign has been remarkably open in demanding that news organizations stop airing interviews or publishing articles about the allegations. Instead of calling it “fake news” (which is virtually copyrighted by Trump), the Biden campaign calls such coverage “conspiracy theories.”

Thus, the campaign wrote to various networks, demanding that they stop airing interviews on the scandal with figures such as Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani. Kate Bedingfield, deputy manager of the Biden campaign, also denounced The New York Times for publishing an op-ed by author Peter Schweizer on the controversy. The campaign apparently expected the Times and the networks to fall in line and bar others from even expressing a view.

Most recently, the campaign fired off letters to Facebook, Twitter and Google, demanding that they take down Trump ads referencing the Hunter Biden contracts. This normally would be viewed as unbridled hubris and arrogance — except that many TV news hosts are doing precisely what the campaign has demanded.

When Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-N.Y.) raised the issue on CNN, host Erin Burnett cut him off: “There is no evidence of Joe Biden doing anything wrong, and this is something that has been looked into, and I think — I want to make a point here — I think what we need to talk about right now is what did the president right now do or not do.” Other CNN hosts have repeated the line of “no evidence of wrongdoing” like a virtual incantation.

Whether the energy company involved with Hunter Biden was fully investigated by Ukraine is hardly a measure of culpability. Ukraine is widely considered one of the more corrupt places on Earth, where paying the children and spouses of powerful people is routine. Indeed, it is quite common in this country, too — and I’ve criticized that practice for more than 30 years in Republican and Democratic administrations alike.

Yet Ukraine was a virtual gold rush for Washington’s elite. Paul Manafort made millions working for Viktor Yanukovych, Ukraine’s corrupt former president. Obama White House counsel Gregory Craig and his law firm tapped into Yanukovych, too. Tony Podesta, Democratic powerbroker and brother of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, and Vin Weber, a former Republican congressman, were implicated in Ukraine dealings.

Hunter Biden’s quest for Ukrainian gold took him to one of Yanukovych’s most controversial and corrupt associates, Mykola Zlochevsky, who leveraged his post as minister of ecology and natural resources to build a fortune. Before fleeing Ukraine, Zlochevsky paid Hunter Biden and several other Americans to be directors of his energy company, Burisma Holdings. Hunter Biden had no experience in the field — but he did have a notable connection to the vice president, who publicly has bragged about making clear to the Ukrainians that he alone controlled U.S. aid to the country. A stepson of former Secretary of State John Kerry also was asked to serve as a director but reportedly declined and warned Hunter Biden not to do it; Biden didn’t listen. He later told The New Yorker that “the decisions that I made were the right decisions for my family and for me.”

His decisions certainly were profitable, but they were not “right” as an ethical matter for himself or his father.

Joe Biden has insisted he never spoke with his son about his foreign dealings — an incredible but categorical statement. The then-vice president flew with his son on Air Force Two on an official trip to China but suggests they never discussed his son’s deal seeking $1.5 billion in investments with the state-backed Bank of China. During the trip, Hunter reportedly introduced his father to Chinese private equity executive Jonathan Li, who was part of that deal. Yet Biden insists he was never told of any business linkage or dealings.

If true, Biden was, at a minimum, willfully blind not to ask his son about potential conflicts or controversies. But it does not appear to be true, at least in part — because Hunter Biden has said he informed his father about the Ukraine deal.

All of this should be of some interest to the media, which has exhaustively — and rightfully — pursued foreign deals by the Trump family. And there is no reason why the media cannot pursue allegations against both the Trumps and the Bidens.

That, however, would counter the narrative that there’s “nothing wrong” with Hunter Biden’s dealings and that it’s all a “lie” that’s best to ignore. As Hartley explained in 1872, good manners dictate that you “never attempt to disparage an absent friend. It is the height of meanness.”

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/465520-he-who-must-not-be-named-how-hunter-biden-became-a-conversation-stopper

Where Is The GOP Response to Hillary, Lerner, McCabe, and other DEM CRIMES?

Will We Ever Prosecute?

By Gordon Wysong  at American Thinker:

.

Imagine that the local cops know that a gang member, named William, broke into the pawn shop and stole guns, jewelry, and money.  William’s fingerprints, film image, and DNA add to the hard evidence log.  The owner knows it; the prosecutor knows it; William’s gang associates know it.  But he is not arrested.  Nearby shopkeepers and neighborhood mothers are asking why he is walking the street.  No one explains it; mum’s the word.  Could it be there is a grand plan to take out the gang’s leaders?  No one knows; mum’s the word.  Shopkeepers and residents are about to give up and start moving away from the area, and no one asks them to stay the course.

Fast-forward to today’s still vocal Obama gang.  Why no indictments?  Mum’s the word.  Can anyone hold to the faith in American justice?  Those who support the rule of law feel like Charlie Brown trying to kick a football.  It’s coming — oh, wait, it’s coming…oh, wait…

Without doubt, a criminal cabal is an extraordinarily complex organization, and understanding who did what, why, when, and how is a challenge to the mental faculties of anyone.  But, what happens if the full scope of activities is never clear?  Does everyone get off?  Does complexity confer immunity?

In engineering, there is no perfect answer to anything, so changes are made incrementally, addressing the problems as they are recognized.  Each step brings a clearer view of remaining problems, which are then addressed, each in its turn.  The completed project is still flawed, but the solution is practical and productive.

So it should be with a grandiose scheme like the Russia Hoax.  The ringleaders don’t have to be handled with kid gloves.  They don’t even have to be handled at all.  Just start with the low-hanging fruit, and get as far as possible.

Those old enough to remember My Lai, Vietnam, know that Lt. Calley and Cpt. Medina were not alone in their actions.  However, their prosecution forever changed the game of passing the buck on war crimes.

So, too, can rabid prosecution of bit players in the Russian Hoax forever change the landscape in plots involving treason.  Those who would participate at the lower levels must know they are subject to prosecution, so they remain circumspect in such a re-enactment of the coup attempt.  This would be the Achilles heel of another cabal — those who are intimidated by the prospect of prison.  Those who realize they don’t have sufficient rank to escape punishment will be loath to participate in such a scheme.  Without them, there will be no operational viability to an unlawful coup.

Admittedly, there are always problems in pursuing a criminal case.  It must be so under our Constitution, but it cannot be impossible!

Prosecutors don’t get all the information, but at a certain point, for each criminal, evidence accumulates that there is a real and provable crime.  It may not include every transgression of that person, nor is it the magic revelation, untangling the Gordian knot of the conspirators.  It is a simple criminal act.  It is what it appears, and it need not be put in the context of the big picture — it is as plain as the nose on your face.

That stage is the stimulus for a prosecutor.  It is the time to move.  If the DOJ acts, many of the sins can never be prosecuted, because the prosecution of their lesser crimes may foreclose pursuit of other crimes under double jeopardy protection.  However, failure to move puts evidence and witnesses at risk of being lost.  This point has passed for so many of the coup conspirators that it seems there will be no justice for many of them, like Lois Lerner.

Why?

A full recounting of all that is already known would be tedious, and to expound on the criminal conduct yet again seems shrill.  It is not necessary to understand the intertwining of all the crimes before simply bringing the charges that are facially obvious.  But the deferral of prosecution, for whatever reason it is done, allows many of the cabal to walk free when they shouldn’t.  In fact, the indication is that they are continuing the very conduct for which they should be prosecuted.

Why has McCabe not been charged with lying to the FBI, lying under oath?  Nothing more is needed to start the dominos falling.  Who will step forward to exonerate him?  No one can, and no one will.  That omission — of a vigorously supported defense — will send a message to the others in the coup conspiracy.

Why has Samantha Power not been indicted for violating national security requirements in unmasking or transferring her unmasking authority to others?  It doesn’t pass the smell test that she is too important to be prosecuted.

Why is Huma Abedin strolling around, free as a bird?  She forwarded classified emails to Anthony Weiner’s laptop.  What else is needed to demonstrate a crime?

Did Strzok do anything?  Did Page?   Which one lied to Congress?  Their contradictory accounts mean at least one is a perjurer.  Sure, there is more “there” there, but it isn’t necessary to keelhaul them; just send them to jail, and send others a message.

Listing all the cabal members, who are quite obviously criminal, is not easy — in fact, it is not doable.  It need not be the aim.  A public that finds this whole thing partisan or tedious will not be easily impressed if a 2,000-count indictment naming 43 people is suddenly dropped.  Bringing along the public is certainly part of sending the message for future conspirators.  It probably is better done gradually.

Removing the context and simply prosecuting crimes is the method to educate both today’s and tomorrow’s citizens.

Selecting single actors, and naming obvious crimes, will have a chance to convince even skeptical partisans that something is wrong.  The lack of support from other participants will indeed remove most doubt.

The full scope of what has gone on will never be known, but the lessons for future participants in such a scheme is essential.  The next time, the prosecution will be more severe, more certain, and more expedient.  Protecting the Constitution is more important than perfect justice.  Some miscreants will escape, but they will never sleep well again.  The lesson must be taught.

A DOJ that fails to move loses its credibility and its honor.  The foundation of the Republic is placed at risk.  Without the rule of law, what do we have?

At some point, deferral of prosecution is dereliction or abetting.  Has it reached that point?

Gordon Wysong is an engineer and entrepreneur who has served as a county commissioner in Cobb County, Ga.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/10/will_we_ever_prosecute.html

Will Brennan and Clapper Finally Begin to Taste THEIR JUST DESSERTS?

Brennan Hears Barr’s ‘Chilling’ Footsteps

By Daniel John Sobieski  at American Thinker:

 

James Clapper, the man who lied to Congress about spying on the American people was shocked back in April to hear William Barr testify before Congress that, yes, he thought that the Trump campaign had been spied upon by his political opponents. As Breitbart reported:

Well, I thought it was most stunning and scary. I was amazed at that and rather disappointed that the attorney general would say such a thing. The term “spying” has all kinds of negative connotations, and I have to believe he chose that term deliberately. And I think it’s incredible that if he has concerns, he would have easily on his first day on the job, after his confirmation, asked his own IG, the Inspector General of the Department of Justice, for a briefing on his preliminary, in the course of his investigation, that is, the IG’s investigation, whether there was any wrongdoing by the FBI.

Barr has more than that, it would seem and has sent chills up Clapper’s spine that the walls may be closing in, not on President Trump, but on Clapper and former CIA Director John Brennan for their seditious roles in the attempted coup against the President. According to a Wall Street Journal report:

Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper says… that Attorney General William Barr appears to be investigating a high-confidence finding of the US intelligence community assessment of the 2016 election sends a “chilling message to the intelligence community.”

Brennan may be hearing those footsteps get louder as well with his increasingly hysterical commentaries at MSNBC, which, along with CNN, is where liars and leakers go to die, warning President Trump to keep off the grass. As Fox News reports:

Brennan… said he was “supposedly” going to be interviewed by U.S. Attorney John Durham but was concerned about Barr’s role in the process of looking at the origins of the long-running Russia election meddling probe.

Given that Barr is now accompanying Durham on these things, it really makes me think that the hand of politics and of Trump are now being used to massage what this ongoing review quasi-investigation is,” Brennan told host Nicole Wallace. “So I am concerned.”

Fox News commentator and former congressman Jason Chaffetz notes Brennan’s panic and feels he is right to be concerned:

Chaffetz expressed that it was important for Barr to investigate Brennan and former director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

“If you’re going to get to the bottom of the FISA [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act] abuse, you have to understand what those two gentlemen were doing or not doing, and Barr has to pursue those facts.”

“I think Brennan and Clapper have both shown their political bias. I think they’re frightened to death that Michael Horowitz report is on the verge of coming out, that Mr. Durham has been on their tail, that the truth is going to be exposed…”

It is laughable for Brennan to be concerned about “the hand of politics” since it was his intelligence community that meddled in the 2016 elections in ways a foreign adversary such as Russia could only dream of and attempted to overthrow a duly elected president. And where did the Ukraine whistleblower come from? John Brennan’s CIA.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer once warned, some would say threatened, Trump, even before he took office, regarding the power of the intelligence community and its wrath against those who question its authority over our government and our lives. As the Washington Examiner reported:

“Let me tell you: You take on the intelligence community — they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you,” said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer Tuesday evening on MSNBC after host Rachel Maddow informed him that intelligence sources told NBC news that the briefing had not been delayed.

Is the Ukraine “whistleblower” the latest attempt by John Brennan’s intelligence community “getting back” at Trump?

As Rush Limbaugh and others have reported, Brennan took a trip to the Ukraine using a fake passport to dig up dirt on Trump:

“Now, John Brennan’s hands are as dirty as Obama’s in this whole thing. John Brennan… traveled to Ukraine back in the time period around 2016 under a fake passport so it wouldn’t be known that he had gone, and he was arranging data on the dossier and all of the other dirt that they were trying to amass. Ukraine — not Russia, Ukraine — is the center of the universe of all this… “John Brennan, Obama’s director-CIA, went to Ukraine under a fake passport so that nobody would know it was him. Fake name. Can you do that? Can you get a fake passport? No. John Brennan can, CIA director. I’m surprised he even needed a passport. But he went under a fake passport to get opposition research on Trump!

As I wrote here recently, Brennan may have colluded with foreign spies to help Hillary Clinton. And the mind harkens back to the day when an op/ed in the Washington Post, that right-wing rag, called for Brennan to be fired for conducting illegal surveillance of the Senate Intelligence Committee and then lying about it:

Brennan was asked by NBC’s Andrea Mitchell whether the CIA had illegally accessed Senate Intelligence Committee staff computers “to thwart an investigation by the committee into” the agency’s past interrogation techniques… Brennan answered:

As far as the allegations of, you know, CIA hacking into, you know, Senate computers, nothing could be further from the truth. I mean, we wouldn’t do that. I mean, that’s — that’s just beyond the — you know, the scope of reason in terms of what we would do. {…}

And, you know, when the facts come out on this, I think a lot of people who are claiming that there has been this tremendous sort of spying and monitoring and hacking will be proved wrong.

(You can see the video of Brennan’s answer here.)

Now we know that the truth was far different. The Post’s Greg Miller reports:

CIA Director John O. Brennan has apologized to leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee after an agency investigation determined that its employees improperly searched computers used by committee staff to review classified files on interrogations of prisoners. {…}

A statement released by the CIA on Tuesday acknowledged that agency employees had searched areas of that computer network that were supposed to be accessible only to committee investigators. Agency employees were attempting to discover how congressional aides had obtained a secret CIA internal report on the interrogation program.

Brennan’s briefing of Sen. Harry Reid, which included information from the Steele dossier, certainly is a key indicator of his participation in the campaign to keep and/or kick Donald Trump out of the White House:

“According to Russian Roulette, by Yahoo! News chief investigative correspondent Michael Isikoff and David Corn, the Washington bureau chief of the left-wing Mother Jones, Brennan contacted Reid on Aug. 25, 2016, to brief him on the state of Russia’s interference in the presidential campaign. Brennan briefed other members of the so-called Gang of Eight, but Reid is the only one who took direct action.

Two days after the briefing, Reid wrote a letter to then-FBI Director James Comey asserting that “evidence of a direct connection between the Russian government and Donald Trump’s presidential campaign continues to mount.”

Reid’s letter referred to some public reporting about Trump campaign associates’ links to the Kremlin, but he also included a reference to information that may not have been made public at the time. He cited allegations that were included in the infamous Steele dossier about Carter Page, an adviser to the Trump campaign at the time.

Brennan is a ringleader in the deep state coup against Trump. Instead of accusing AG Bill Barr of being corrupt, this might be a good time for Brennan to exercise his right to be silent.

Daniel John Sobieski is a former editorial writer for Investor’s Business Daily and free lance writer whose pieces have appeared in Human Events, Reason Magazine, and the Chicago Sun-Times among other publications.               

 

Whoever Would Have Thought Our Dems Would Fall in Love With Leninthink!

LENINTHINK

by Scott Johnson  at PowerLine:

I recently drew the attention of Power Line readers to Professor Gary Saul Morson’s essay “How the great truth dawned.” It leads off the September issue of The New Criterion. Beginning and ending with Solzhenitsyn, it takes up the Gulag, Communism, mass murder, Russian literature, the turn to God and much more. It is a great essay.

The New Criterion invited Professor Morson back to deliver its inaugural Circle Lecture last week. It has posted an edited version of his lecture under the title “Leninthink.” The lecture includes a small autobiographical component along with a penetrating explanation of the essence of Lenin’s thought.

Professor Morson observes: “Leninist ways of thinking continue to spread, especially among Western radicals who have never read a word of Lenin. This essay is not just about Lenin, and not just Leninism, the official philosophy of the ussr, but also the very style of thought that Lenin pioneered.” He calls it Leninthink. Professor Morson concludes this invaluable lecture with an open question:

When Leninism is significant, there will always be a spectrum going from those who really understand, to those who just practice the appropriate responses, to those who are entirely innocent. The real questions are: Is there such a spectrum now, and how do we locate people on it? And if there is such a spectrum, what do we do about it?

“There is no space to address such questions here,” writes Professor Morson. “My point is that they need to be asked.” With this essay he gives us the tools of analysis and with the return of the hard left to a prominent place in our public life the questions have become urgent.

 

Leninthink

But, What Was Obama’s Communist John Brennan Doing As Head of the CIA?

Trump Screwed Up the Democrat Plan by Releasing the Transcript

Sep 30, 2019,  by Rush Limbaugh

RUSH: Here’s a little theory I have. You know, they’re running the same playbook with just different people. This whistleblower complaint may as well be the Steele dossier, its version of the Steele dossier, lies, made up, bunch of anonymous sources, we don’t know who it is. And just like the Steele dossier, it was put together by opponents of Donald Trump and being made to look like it’s legitimate intelligence.

Everything about it, it’s right out of the Christine Blasey Ford playbook as well. She has this letter. She sends this letter to her member of Congress, who then gives it to Dianne Feinstein, and they supposedly hold it, they’re really worried, they don’t want embarrass Blasey Ford by going public with this, it’s so humiliating for a woman to have been abused and so forth.

But then it looked like Kavanaugh was gonna sail through, so they had to release the letter, and they embarrass Blasey Ford and they had to bring Blasey Ford up to testify. She didn’t want to do it, but they made her do it. She didn’t like flying, they put her on a private jet. You know the drill on this.

This is the same thing. This whistleblower is Christopher Steele. We don’t know who it is. He doesn’t have firsthand knowledge of anything by his own admission. We don’t know who it was that fed him whatever it is he knows. Now Democrats are going crazy like, “Oh, my God. Oh, my God. We’ve got treason here, oh, my God.”

Trump blows it sky-high by releasing the transcript of the call and thereby blows the whistleblower out of the water. The moment Trump released that transcript, we knew more than the whistleblower knew. It effectively took the whistleblower out of the game.

They have to, however, keep the illusion going so they have this scam running about when the whistleblower’s gonna testify and the whistleblower’s afraid that he’s gonna get killed and the whistleblower is under federal protection, none of which happens to be true, but the news networks are not denying it. They’re not fixing their mistake because there is no mistake, it’s all part of the illusion.

Trump was not supposed to release that transcript, in their thinking. He screwed the timeline that they had planned by releasing the transcript of the call and the complaint. See, the plan, what they thought Trump would do, because they still don’t understand Trump. They still look at Trump as they look at every other president. They look at Trump, they haven’t taken the time to examine why he got elected, why his voters like him, who he is. They’ve created this caricature of the guy that’s nowhere near truthful and real and they go with that.

They thought Trump would protect the presidency. They thought Trump would be thinking of future presidents and that he would not give away that transcript, he would not reveal for the other branches, he wouldn’t give the legislative branch any of what he was doing. He would protect his executive branch power. This is what the Democrats thought any president would do. So they make this allegation, got a whistleblower. What Trump was supposed to do in their original timeline, Trump was supposed to not release the transcript.

That’s what they thought he would do. They thought he would close it down, not reveal it. They thought when that happened, he would make himself look guilty. Then he would appear to be stonewalling. And then they could say he’s already engaged in a cover-up. Remember, the cover-up is always worse than the crime. That’s what we learned from Nixon. They were attempting, in other words, to engender a cover-up and stonewall.

The whistleblower is a phony! Whatever the whistleblower claims to have been told is phony! We know what Trump talked about. It’s in the transcript, which has been released. Trump blew them up, folks. Today, instead of debating the whistleblower and is he gonna testify and is he afraid for being murdered, we were supposed to be talking about Trump stonewalling and covering up because he would have known he had been had.

All of late last week and this weekend and into today, the Democrats’ original plan was to be all over the media accusing Trump of stonewalling and covering up by not revealing or releasing the transcript of the call, thereby the Democrats could say whatever the whistleblower said was in it. The whistleblower could allege anything.

As long as Trump didn’t release the transcript, the whistleblower’s account would be all anybody had. The whistleblower makes it look bad, and then Trump doesn’t release and that looks like a cover-up and it looks like a stonewall and the Democrats think, we got him!

Trump releases the transcript. There’s nothing in it. Pencil Neck has to go lie about it from his committee chairmanship chair during an official committee hearing! He lied about what Trump said. Which to me proves what their original plan was, to lie and make up what was in that phone call without ever any evidence to contradict them because Trump wouldn’t release it.

And then this valiant whistleblower, oh, yeah, the very brave, valiant whistleblower, at great personal risk, would agree to valiantly come forward and testify, maybe by remote video hookup in shadow behind a bulletproof cage. Make sure that agents of Donald Trump and the NRA didn’t blow him up with an RPG during the middle of his testimony.

But I think the Trumpster, whether he does this by instinct or grand strategical design, I don’t know, but he was a bit too nimble for ’em. He never sticks to their script! And this is what they never learn! He never sticks to their script, like other Republicans, you can bank on Republicans sticking to the script that Democrats write for them. Because the Democrats write those scripts with decades of history and knowledge and understanding of how Republicans are gonna act, i.e., afraid, i.e., protective, i.e., guilty.

But that’s not how Donald Trump comports himself. This is kind of like if Nixon had released the tapes on day one, what would they have had? They would have had a lot less than they had with trying to make it up and that 15 minutes of silence or whatever it was. Because those tapes showed that much of what has been alleged about Watergate hadn’t actually happened. But the Democrats back then were able to manufacture another illusion: Nixon hiding it in the tapes, not releasing them, gave them all the leeway they needed to tell anybody in the world what was on those tapes and what might be.

So Trump releasing the transcript of the call takes the whistleblower out. So now here’s John Brennan begging for more whistleblowers! If you have any direct or indirect knowledge of Donald Trump being a scumbag, you can come forward. We want you to, says John Brennan, Obama’s director of the CIA.

Last Friday on this very program I told you that this plan of theirs was not going over the way they had planned. And many of you doubted me simply because it’s in such direct contravention to what you see in the media every day. The media makes it look like Trump’s gone. Just a matter of the clock and the calendar playing out, Trump’s gone, Democrats have done it, he’s finished.

And then here you hear me saying that things are falling apart on them. You think, “Is Rush just trying to keep us in a good frame of mind?” No, I’m not. I’m telling you what I really think. You can’t tell me the whistleblower — really? The whistleblower, they’re trying to keep the whistleblower alive today as somebody — I mean, his issue, his knowledge and so forth. Trump has blown that out of the water releasing the transcript. Remember John Kasich on CNN Friday — he’s a big Never Trumper, doesn’t like Trump at all, would love for Trump to be thrown out of office — he’s on with CNN. He said, “You know, you can’t impeach a guy over a phone call.”

The CNN infobabe got really mad. It was Alisyn Camerota (paraphrasing), “What do you mean, can’t impeach him over a phone call? Look what was on the phone call.” Kasich had to tell ’em there’s nothing in the phone call that’s impeachable, and he then said there’s nothing impeachable in the Mueller report. I wonder if he’ll be back? You know, Phil Mudd’s still not back on CNN.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: The House vote on impeachment is not gonna be until December, and the reason is they need that much time to lie each and every day, to gin up public support for it, folks. That’s exactly why they’re waiting and that means the whole of next year will be impeachment, not issues related to the American people, so just get ready.

This massive lie, series of lies, this illusion is gonna continue every day as they try to gin up public support for impeaching Trump. That’s why they’ve pushed this vote back to December. To them, getting rid of him even before the election, that’s what they want to do to prove their power, to prove to themselves they can do it, plus they also know that they can’t beat Trump in 2020. I think that’s part of their calculus.

I mean, Al Green, Democrat from wherever, in the House of Representatives, said last week during this bogus committee hearing that “if we don’t impeach Trump, he’s gonna be reelected in 2020.” Stop and process that. How can a guy so undeserving of finishing his term be reelected if the Democrats don’t get rid of him? So, folks, you’re gonna have to steel yourselves for this, because the things I’m describing are not going to let up.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: No sooner did I say it than it came out of the Oval Office — and I don’t have time to play it for you. I said on the radio that Trump blowing up the Democrat scheme, blew it up by releasing the transcript of his call with the Ukraine president. The president today said, “I released the transcript. It was so good, Schiff had to make something up.” I’ll keep the sound bite for tomorrow, ’cause it proves cutting edge of societal evolution.

 

Trump Screwed Up the Democrat Plan by Releasing the Transcript

When will Americans Begin to Notice the Schiff Fascists Now Destroying Our American Dream to Seek and Honor TRUTH!

Where would we Americans be today without the devotion for truth and freedom exercised by honest Jewish folks such as John Hinderaker and Dennis Prager?

Our American Christian community, may God Bless Them, seems to have retreated into the Roman catacombs again  (for another 500 years?).   At least they still worship the importance of Truth over Evil when  80% of their voters went for  and elected Donald J. Trump to the American Presidency in 2016!!

THEY, ABOVE ALL OTHER AMERICAN GROUPS  RECOGNIZED HILLARY’S FASCISTIC  EVILS.

What makes Evil in a live human animal? ……  THE ABSENCE OF TRUTH AND HUMAN DECENCY, something I learned at Church and in school, kindergarten to college and graduate school when America was still the AMERICAN DREAM!

It isn’t too hard to understand….UNLESS YOU ARE FASCISTS LIKE  ADAM SCHIFF,  NANCY PELOSI, JERRY NADLER,  CHARLES SCHUMER, RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, BERNIE SANDERS, ERIC SWALWELL, MAXINE WATERS, GEORGE SOROS, HOLLYWOOD, AND UNIVERSITIES and other mouths running today’s Fascistic Dem Party absent of traditional American values dreamed and honored.

Fox News is also among this crowd of evil, but probably not by design…., perhaps their STAR animals don’t know the evil they are  nursing when selling  Adam Schiff and crowd.   “Conservative” Fox advertises “fair and balanced”  news….and so,  sells  Schiff FASCIST disorders and lies  as equal to those honest traditional Republicans and Democrats who still honor and strive for Truth and honesty but are too gutless or too uneducated to know or remember how vitally important EXERCISING TRUTH IS IN A FREEDOM LOVING COUNTRY  LIKE AMERICA IN MY LIFETIME  STRUGGLED TO MAINTAIN WHEN IT VALUED THE GUIDE OF GODFEARING JUDEOCHRISTIANITY!

I have never met John Hinderaker, one of my heroes trying to save our traditional American values in our days of Schiff swamp.   He seems to be a very gentle gentleman when evaluating the fascist and fascistic horrors now overwhelming our dreams of America!   Such gentlemen are better than no gentlemen at all.

The human female animal prefers security over freedom.   Fascism whether German, Soviet, Maoist, or Schiff-style doesn’t really seem to matter as long as she feels ‘SECURE’.

Ban All the Red Hats?

When Will America’s Foul Dem Fascists Get Their Just Desserts?

Rudy Giuliani tells Dems they’ve walked into a trap

By Thomas Lifson at  American Thinker:

.

Rudy Giuliani, President Trump’s personal lawyer and old friend from New York, was on fire last night, clearly ecstatic over what lies ahead for the Democrats now that they have made impeachment theater the public focus of the House of Representatives going into a presidential election year.  Of course, they do this without actually voting on impeachment, which would require her members to go on the record, regarded as poisonous for the 2018 class of new Democrats elected in districts that Trump carried in 2016.  But Giuliani knows that they have opened Pandora’s box with massive scandals involving Joe Biden and other members of the Obama administration.

So elated was Giuliani that he appeared in two long segments of The Ingraham Angle last night, totaling almost half an hour of airtime.  In the first segment that lasted nearly 15 minutes, he was so amped up providing a preview of what is to come that he started losing his voice, and Laura Ingraham had to cut him off for a commercial break.  He returned for a second segment to respond to a Democrat, former Chuck Schumer aide Chris Hahn, on whom he unloaded angrily.  Both segments are embedded below.

It was in the first segment that he gave a preview of what lies ahead, and it is evident that he and his client, President Trump, have been waiting for the right moment to launch their counterattack.

• “The Democrats have stepped into something way beyond what they realize.”
• “We’ve lost the FBI…and who knows what else?
• “They have walked into a trap.”
• “There’s only one reason the Chinese spent all that money: to buy Joe Biden.”
• He warned, “I have the records” about the actual corruption of Biden and his son, who he said have provided “evidence of guilty knowledge.”
• This impeachment effort is “[c]overing up for what will turn out to be massive corruption in the Obama administration.”
• “The Clintons enriched themselves in public office to the tune of hundreds of millions.”

Here is the juiciest part of the interview, roughly the last three minutes, for those in a hurry.

Here is the complete segment, almost a quarter-hour long:

And here is the second segment, in which he lays into Chris Hahn:

Graphic credit: YouTube screen grab.

 

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/09/rudy_giuliani_tells_dems_theyve_walked_into_a_trap.html

What Was SOCIALISM of the “Union of Soviet SOCIALIST Republics” of Fascist Venezuela, et alia?

WHAT IS SOCIALISM?

by  John Hinderaker  at  PowerLine:

Many, like us, are appalled that some politicians now openly advocate the failed system of socialism, while they and others try to deny the obvious fact that free enterprise has enriched the lives of billions of people. One is tempted to chalk such opinions up to an abysmal ignorance of history.

But something else is going on, too. The meaning of “socialism” has evolved; or, one might say, it is flying under a false flag. When Democratic politicians advocate socialism, they don’t talk about North Korea, Soviet Russia, Albania, Cuba (anymore) or Venezuela (anymore). Rather, they talk about Sweden, Denmark and Norway–countries that are not, in fact, socialist. One might conclude that they just want a slightly larger welfare state–accompanied, although they never say this, by a less progressive tax system and often more business-friendly policies.

Americas Majority Foundation has done some interesting polling on how Americans view socialism, as well as free market capitalism. Their report is embedded below; I recommend reading it in its entirety. Here are a few highlights:

We surveyed voters how they view the terms Socialism and Capitalism. On socialism, we asked “When you hear or read the term ‘socialism’, do you think of Scandinavian Social Democracies like Denmark and Sweden OR Venezuela, North Korea and the Former Soviet Union?” On Capitalism, we asked, “When you hear or read the phrase ‘free market capitalism’ do you think…It is an economic system that allows people to pursue their passions and create their own careers and businesses or do you think It is an economic system where those at the top benefit at the expense of the rest?”

That, I think, is a good way of posing the questions.

At the Top Line, 52% of all respondents associate “Socialism” with “Denmark/Sweden.” Simultaneously, 52% relate “Free Market Capitalism” to “pursue their passions.”

So there are a considerable number of voters who, in this sense, approve of both socialism and capitalism.

When we studied 18-65-year-olds, we found that overall voters view socialism closer to Nordic countries as opposed to Venezuela by 52% to 48%. 67% of Democrats viewed socialism as similar to a Nordic country compared to 38% of Republicans. 51% of Independents view socialism similarly to Nordic countries compared to 49% who viewed socialism as a worst-case disaster.

So the ships are largely passing in the night. When Bernie Sanders et al. say they want socialism, we think they mean Venezuela, while a large majority of Democrats think they mean Denmark. The problem is that the Democrats’ policies are far closer to those of Venezuela than to those of Scandinavia.

Free enterprise, the greatest engine in history for improvement of the human condition, is depressingly controversial.

Overall 52% of voters view free markets as benefiting the rich while 48% of voters viewed free market as allowing individuals to allow to pursue their dream. As you would suspect, 64% of Democrats view free market benefitting the wealthy while 69% of Republicans view free markets as a liberating force that allows them to pursue their dream. 51% of Independents agree with Democrats that free markets benefit the top 1% and 49% agree with Republicans on the benefit of the free markets in pursuing their dreams.

For what it’s worth, 18 to 34 year old voters are among the most likely to be pro-free enterprise by this measure.

There is a great deal more, including some commentary and conclusions, in the embedded document, but for now I will add one more data point. What ethnic group do you think is most likely to associate socialism with Venezuela? Not whites or Asians, but Hispanics–probably because they are more aware of the Venezuelan catastrophe than the average American. This suggests a fruitful avenue for Republican candidates to appeal to Hispanic voters in 2020.

 

What Is Socialism?

(I spent a month in the good old USSR of 1966 when it wasn’t quite the land of  Stalinist “Socialist” murder anymore but of socialist fascist police state variety, nevertheless.   Although I spoke the elegant  tsarist accent variety, the pre-Soviet Russian language one,  the one I was taught by sons and daughters of tsarist Russians who fled their Manchurian sanctuaries from Chairman Mao’s troops in the late 1940s,  no Soviet person I met in 1966 was aware of the accent’s past.   I was allowed to roam freely….by the rules of the National Defense Education Act which was paying my way.

I returned to Soviet Russia, (the USSR), in 1990 to accompany  a Anoka area Protestant church group which had raised thousands of dollars to be given to hospitalized  victims of the Chernobyl nuclear plant disaster not far from Kiev.

It’s too bad that in today’s feminized CNN’s fascistic American education systems from K through college and their mouthy gangs of Socialist “Democrats” competing for the American presidency  couldn’t have spent a week or a day living in the Fascistic Socialist USSR world  they are now selling!   If they mouthed or demonstrated a complaint against the State, they would most likely have been  made to disappear…..even forever!

Can Free America Survive When its Democrats, its Colleges, its Communication Industry Become Fascists?

CAN AMERICANS STILL CO-EXIST?

by John Hinderaker  at PowerLine:

That the yawning chasm between blue and red America continues to widen is obvious. It has gotten to the point, frankly, where one wonders what we still have in common as Americans. Today’s instance is a resolution by San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors labeling the National Rifle Association, America’s largest and most successful civil rights group, a “domestic terrorism organization.”

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors passed a resolution on Tuesday declaring the National Rifle Association a “domestic terrorism organization” due to its opposition to more stringent gun-control legislation.

I am so old, I can remember when a typical second grader knew the difference between someone you disagree with and a terrorist. But today’s liberals don’t function at that level.

The resolution accuses the NRA of not only resisting legislative reforms that its drafters believe would help curtail the country’s “epidemic of gun violence,” but also of “incit[ing] gun owners to acts of violence.”

This is insane. The NRA obviously has not incited anyone to violence. On the contrary, it has trained many thousands of Americans in gun safety and has saved countless lives by doing so.

“All countries have violent and hateful people, but only in America do we give them ready access to assault weapons and large-capacity magazines thanks, in large part, to the National Rifle Association’s influence,” the resolution says.

The “assault weapon” and “large-capacity magazine” dodges are too familiar to require comment. One remarkable fact about the left’s obsession with banning “assault weapons,” a category without a meaningful definition, is that it has already been tried. The ban was allowed to expire after a decade because it did zero good.

One might ask, what on God’s green Earth does the San Francisco Board of Supervisors have to do with the National Rifle Association?

The resolution also declares the Board’s intent to “limit those entities who do business with the City and County of San Francisco from doing business with this domestic terrorist organization.”

It is hard to know what this means, but the idea, obviously, is to use the Left’s boycott strategy. Whether this is actually implemented, and what effects it may have on banks; hotel, restaurant and retail store chains; and who knows what other businesses, remains to be seen. What we do know is that this action by San Francisco typifies the kind of hateful, irrational conduct that has made any civil political discourse in this country impossible.

Via InstaPundit.

 

Can Americans Still Co-Exist?

Will Hillary’s Fascists at the FBI Finally Confront Their Crimes?

10 declassified Russia collusion revelations that could rock Washington this fall

BY JOHN SOLOMON, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR…..at the Hill:

 

Behind the scenes, some major events were set in motion last autumn that could soon change the tenor in Washington, at least as it relates to the debunked Russia collusion narrative that distracted America for nearly three years.

It was in September 2018 that President Trump told my Hill.TV colleague Buck Sexton and me that he would order the release of all classified documents showing what the FBI, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and other U.S. intelligence agencies may have done wrong in the Russia probe.

About the same time, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, under then-Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), voted unanimously to send 53 nonpublic transcripts of witnesses in its Russia review to the director of national intelligence (DNI) for declassification. The transcripts were officially delivered in November.

Now, nearly a year later, neither release has happened.

To put that into perspective, it took just a couple of months in 2004 to declassify the final report on the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks after a presidential commission finished its work, which contained some of the nation’s most secretive intelligence revelations.

But the long wait for transparency may soon end.

The foot-dragging inside the intelligence community (IC) that occurred under now-departed DNI Dan Coats and his deputy, Sue Gordon, could halt abruptly. That’s particularly true if Trump appoints a new IC sheriff, such as former House Intelligence Committee Chairman Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.), the current ambassador to the Netherlands, or longtime national security expert Fred Fleitz.

Likewise, the president has an opportunity to speed up and organize the release of declassified information by simply creating an Office of Transparency and Accountability inside his own White House, run by a staffer empowered at the level of a formal assistant to the president. That would prevent intelligence agencies from continuing their game of public keep-away.

Nunes, who helped to unravel the Russia collusion farce, has identified five buckets of information he’d like to see released. One of those buckets, the FBI’s interview reports on Bruce Ohr’s cooperation, was released last week — not through a Trump declassification order but, rather, through litigation brought by Judicial Watch, and with heavy redactions.

My reporting, including interviews with four dozen U.S. officials over the last several months, actually identifies a much larger collection of documents — about a dozen all together — that, when declassified, would show more completely how a routine counterintelligence probe was hijacked to turn the most awesome spy powers in America against a presidential nominee in what was essentially a political dirty trick orchestrated by Democrats.

Here are the documents that have the greatest chance of rocking Washington, if declassified:

1.)   Christopher Steele’s confidential human source reports at the FBI. These documents, known in bureau parlance as 1023 reports, show exactly what transpired each time Steele and his FBI handlers met in the summer and fall of 2016 to discuss his anti-Trump dossier. The big reveal, my sources say, could be the first evidence that the FBI shared sensitive information with Steele, such as the existence of the classified Crossfire Hurricane operation targeting the Trump campaign. It would be a huge discovery if the FBI fed Trump-Russia intel to Steele in the midst of an election, especially when his ultimate opposition-research client was Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee (DNC). The FBI has released only one or two of these reports under Freedom of Information Act lawsuits and they were 100 percent redacted. The American public deserves better.

2.)   The 53 House Intel interviews. House Intelligence interviewed many key players in the Russia probe and asked the DNI to declassify those interviews nearly a year ago, after sending the transcripts for review last November. There are several big reveals, I’m told, including the first evidence that a lawyer tied to the Democratic National Committee had Russia-related contacts at the CIA.

3.)   The Stefan Halper documents. It has been widely reported that European-based American academic Stefan Halper and a young assistant, Azra Turk, worked as FBI sources. We know for sure that one or both had contact with targeted Trump aides like Carter Page and George Papadopoulos at the end of the election. My sources tell me there may be other documents showing Halper continued working his way to the top of Trump’s transition and administration, eventually reaching senior advisers like Peter Navarro inside the White House in summer 2017. These documents would show what intelligence agencies worked with Halper, who directed his activity, how much he was paid and how long his contacts with Trump officials were directed by the U.S. government’s Russia probe.

4.)   The October 2016 FBI email chain. This is a key document identified by Rep. Nunes and his investigators. My sources say it will show exactly what concerns the FBI knew about and discussed with DOJ about using Steele’s dossier and other evidence to support a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant targeting the Trump campaign in October 2016. If those concerns weren’t shared with FISA judges who approved the warrant, there could be major repercussions.

5.)   Page/Papadopoulos exculpatory statements. Another of Nunes’s five buckets, these documents purport to show what the two Trump aides were recorded telling undercover assets or captured in intercepts insisting on their innocence. Papadopoulos told me he told an FBI undercover source in September 2016 that the Trump campaign was not trying to obtain hacked Clinton documents from Russia and considered doing so to be treason. If he made that statement with the FBI monitoring, and it was not disclosed to the FISA court, it could be another case of FBI or DOJ misconduct.

6.)   The ‘Gang of Eight’ briefing materials. These were a series of classified briefings and briefing books the FBI and DOJ provided key leaders in Congress in the summer of 2018 that identify shortcomings in the Russia collusion narrative. Of all the documents congressional leaders were shown, this is most frequently cited to me in private as having changed the minds of lawmakers who weren’t initially convinced of FISA abuses or FBI irregularities.

7.)   The Steele spreadsheet. I wrote recently that the FBI kept a spreadsheet on the accuracy and reliability of every claim in the Steele dossier. According to my sources, it showed as much as 90 percent of the claims could not be corroborated, were debunked or turned out to be open-source internet rumors. Given Steele’s own effort to leak intel in his dossier to the media before Election Day, the public deserves to see the FBI’s final analysis of his credibility. A document I reviewed recently showed the FBI described Steele’s information as only “minimally corroborated” and the bureau’s confidence in him as “medium.”

8.)   The Steele interview. It has been reported, and confirmed, that the DOJ’s inspector general interviewed the former British intelligence operative for as long as 16 hours about his contacts with the FBI while working with Clinton’s opposition research firm, Fusion GPS. It is clear from documents already forced into the public view by lawsuits that Steele admitted in the fall of 2016 that he was desperate to defeat Trump, had a political deadline to make his dirt public, was working for the DNC/Clinton campaign and was leaking to the news media. If he told that to the FBI and it wasn’t disclosed to the FISA court, there could be serious repercussions.

9.)   The redacted sections of the third FISA renewal application. This was the last of four FISA warrants targeting the Trump campaign; it was renewed in June 2017 after special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe had started and signed by then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. It is the one FISA application that House Republicans have repeatedly asked to be released, and I’m told the big reveal in the currently redacted sections of the application is that it contained both misleading information and evidence of intrusive tactics used by the U.S. government to infiltrate Trump’s orbit.

10.)  Records of allies’ assistance. Multiple sources have said a handful of U.S. allies overseas — possibly Great Britain, Australia and Italy — were asked to assist FBI efforts to check on Trump connections to Russia. Members of Congress have searched recently for some key contact documents with British intelligence. My sources say these documents might help explain Attorney General William Barr’s recent comments that “the use of foreign intelligence capabilities and counterintelligence capabilities against an American political campaign, to me, is unprecedented and it’s a serious red line that’s been crossed.”

John Solomon is an award-winning investigative journalist whose work over the years has exposed U.S. and FBI intelligence failures before the Sept. 11 attacks, federal scientists’ misuse of foster children and veterans in drug experiments, and numerous cases of political corruption. He is an investigative columnist and executive vice president for video at The Hill. Follow him on Twitter @jsolomonReports.

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/458173-10-declassified-russia-collusion-revelations-that-could-rock-washington-this