Government Corruption

Opinion/Analysis: Democrats, rioters don’t care about George Floyd — they’re just using him

Why is anybody surprised to see the racial extortion, lawless rioting and selfish looting in the streets of America’s big cities today — all in the name of an unarmed black man named George Floyd, who died in police custody last week? There is a whole political party in America today that is entirely built upon such racial exploitation. Democratic Party leaders in Washington do not actually care about the hardships of blacks in America today. They simply want to weaponize those hardships into votes year after year after year. Or, as one major Democrat in South Carolina famously said: “I don’t want to buy the black vote. I just want to rent it for a day.” That “day” being Election Day. They can all go back to their misery all the other days of the year. Like President Trump said: “What have you got to lose?” Lawless rioting? That is but a mere extension of the bald dishonesty and unhinged lawlessness that defines the Democratic Party today. Take their lawless pursuit of Mr. Trump, for instance. Ever since he got elected, Democrats have accused him of everything under the sun from colluding with Russians to steal the election to bribing the Ukrainian government to sparking the Chinese pandemic. All of it has been exhaustively investigated to no end. Some Democrats in Washington are actually still defending the secret evidence they claim to have proving that Mr. Trump has committed all sorts of their invented crimes. It’s all lies. Their trumped-up, manufactured charges against the president expose the profound lawlessness that even many of their own supporters now realize were nothing more than fantasies. So, really, is it any wonder that you would have roving bands of lawless thugs in masks thronging the streets, torching police cars, smashing windows and burning churches? They learned it from the best. And what about the rampant looting? I mean, why not? As President Obama’s chief of staff — who later became the mayor of Chicago — openly preached: Never let a crisis go to waste. You need a 60-inch high definition, plasma TV? Well, just grab a red cart, smash the windows at Target and load up as many as you can wheel out the door. All in the name of George Floyd. Want a free case of liquor? Take a tire iron and pry open the steel door from the alley and grab all the booze you can carry. All in the name of George Floyd. Truth is, these people don’t care about George Floyd. Or anybody else, for that matter. They are worthless criminals who belong in jail for the rest of their lives. They do not belong in civilized society. But is it any different than the example set by Democratic politicians in Washington today? When the pandemic hit earlier this year, Washington Democrats in the House used it as an opportunity to loot the American treasury for all manner of ill-gotten booty for all their various special interests. At the height of the global emergency, Democrats passed smash-and-grab legislation to pay off all their constituencies, including labor unions, the U.S. Postal Service, illegal aliens and universities. They also decided to hijack all future American elections to make it easier to commit election fraud. All in the name of the coronavirus pandemic that was on its way to killing more than 100,000 Americans. So, is it any surprise that the looters and rioters burning American cities today would do the same thing? The really sad part of all this is that George Floyd deserves better. Now, we don’t know everything that led up to his unfortunate death. But certainly, he did not deserve to die. At a time when very few things unify America, Mr. Floyd’s death unified the country. But that spark of hope was quickly doused. Soon, lawless looters and violent thugs decided to exploit Mr. Floyd’s death for their own gain. Like the man said, never let a crisis go to waste.

No kidding..   Thanks to veteran columnist Charles Hurt for that spot-on op/ed.  He’s another one who is saying what needs to be said.  These punks, thugs and losers are using the tragic death of George Floyd as some pretext to commit all of these awful acts of violence and mayhem.  It’s disingenuous at best.  Even those marching (more or less peacefully) during the day are rallying around lies.  The whole holding their hands up and chanting “Stop, don’t shoot” is a reference to Ferguson, MO in August of 2014,  and what turned out to be a lie.  In August 2014, Michael Brown NEVER said that as Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson, a decorated officer, tried to arrest him.  After MULTIPLE autopsies, and several investigations including testimonies from eye-witnesses and video footage, it was determined that Officer Wilson acted appropriately, and only shot Brown in self defense as he was going for the officer’s gun.  And to those who are holding up signs, or wearing t-shirts that say, “Justice for George Floyd”…Here’s a newsflash..  The cop in question, Derek Chauvin, was fired from the Minneapolis Police Department.  His wife has filed for divorce, and oh..btw.. He was arrested and has already been charged with multiple charges including murder and manslaughter.  So, justice IS being served, as well it should be.  What he did was abhorrent, and he’s in jail.  Done and done.  The system worked.   Time to move on.  Anyways..  Charlie can be reached at churt@washingtontimes.com or @charleshurt on Twitter.   Excellent!!     🙂

Opinion: Trump’s modesty and ending political persecutions

Again and again, it is President Trump’s quiet, patient modesty that shines through. Especially compared to the suffocating loud-mouthed arrogance of his predecessor. It was Mr. Trump’s own Department of Justice that determined that its own agents and lawyers had abused their power in persecuting retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn and moved to drop all charges against him. After all, the foundation of the investigation into Flynn had turned out to be a fantastical conspiracy concocted by political enemies, DOJ had used highly duplicitous means to entrap Flynn, and the frontline agents who interviewed Flynn did not believe he had intentionally lied. And of course, the only reason Flynn pleaded guilty is that two years and $5 million into this whole Kafka-esque nightmare, the retired Three Star agreed to plead guilty in exchange for assurances that the same power-drunk liars who destroyed him would not do the same to his son. Any devoted father would have done the same thing. When the news broke that Flynn had been exonerated, Mr. Trump learned about it like the rest of us. Certainly, there had been rumors and court filings beforehand that had sparked widespread commentary about Flynn’s case. And President Trump being President Trump, he had commented volubly on the topic. “I think he’s a fine man,” Mr. Trump said many, many times. “I think it’s terrible what they did to him.” Seeking to bait Mr. Trump into negative stories they were plotting, reporters asked the president whether he would bring Flynn back into the White House. “It’s something that nobody’s asked me. You’re asking me for the first time,” he said. “I would certainly consider it. Yeah, I would.” No top secret meetings. No huddling in the Oval Office behind closed doors to plot a miscarriage of justice. No confabs with the most powerful operatives in his government to conspire against his political enemies. Just wide-open, off-the-cuff musings from a perilously-open mind. That is President Trump, leader of the free world. Now, compare that to his predecessor, who weaponized the Justice Department like nothing we have seen in the better part of a half century. President Barack Obama’s first Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. famously described his role in the Department of Justice as Mr. Obama’s “wingman.” Meaning, of course, that Mr. Holder used his position as America’s top law enforcement officer to shoot down and destroy Mr. Obama’s enemies. Say, for instance, a retired three star general that Mr. Obama fired as the head of the Defense Intelligence Agency over his criticisms of Mr. Obama’s prosecution of the war on terror. Now, certainly, Mr. Obama had every right to fire Flynn. That is any president’s prerogative. But it was a wild abuse of power for Mr. Obama’s Department of Justice to hatch an elaborate conspiracy to entrap Flynn after he later became a political enemy. Compare Mr. Trump’s hands-off approach to Flynn’s case to the intimately-involved approach of his predecessor. In the weeks leading up to Mr. Trump’s inauguration, Mr. Obama stunned members of his own administration with his intimate knowledge of the Flynn case during a secret meeting with his top intelligence henchmen in the Oval Office. Even in jubilant victory after the Flynn case got dropped, Mr. Trump kept the focus precisely where it belonged. Instead of just brooding over the treatment of one man, Mr. Trump was more concerned about the larger issue of unjust abuse of power at the highest levels of the Department of Justice. “What happened to General Michael Flynn, a war hero, should never be allowed to happen to a citizen of the United States,” Mr. Trump said in a triumphant Twitter message. A few minutes later, Mr. Trump added in all capital letters: “Dirty cop James Comey got caught!” Obviously, such boisterous gloating over the ruination of fired and disgraced former FBI Director James Comey is not exactly quiet or modest. But, wisely, the president keeps the political squabbling in the political realm where it belongs. Mr. Trump does not allow his political fever to infect the judicial process as his predecessor did. Mr. Trump’s extreme modesty allows his Attorney General William P. Barr to act with the same judicial modesty and reverence for the rule of law. At a press conference Monday, Mr. Barr lamented the “increasing attempts to use the criminal justice system as a political weapon.” He vowed the practice would end under Mr. Trump, telling reporters that his department is not presently seeking criminal charges against either Mr. Obama or his vice president, Joe Biden. “The legal tactic has been to gin up allegations of criminality by one’s political opponents based on the flimsiest of legal theories,” Mr. Barr fretted. “This is not a good development.”

Indeed..  This op-ed by Charles Hurt caught our eye because not too many articles are written about Trump’s “modesty.”  Definitely a paradigm shift.  But, Charlie sure does make several good points.  Remember when Obama used to openly, and proudly say he used to be a “community organizer?”  Not sure how that was a good resume enhancer for for being President of the United States.  Anyway..  With that in mind..  Obama is from Chicago, and was the general counsel (i.e. senior attorney) for ACORN; a corrupt “community” voter outreach organization that got kids to go out and get people registered to vote for Democrats in their communities.  These would be high-school kids who were paid for each voter’s signature they could get.  In many instances they would get someone in an inner city to register multiple times.  To these kids, it was a competition.  At any rate, as you might imagine, ACORN ending up being indicted by the FBI in several states for voter fraud; something Democrats tell us all the time is nonexistent.  So, coming full circle, Obama was a Chicago thug in he White House who routinely abused his position as President, and this latest revelation about what was done to retired LTG Michael Flynn is just the latest example.  To his credit, President Trump has let the process run its course and allowed our very capable and competent AG William Barr to do his job without interference.  Thanks for that piece, Charlie!     You can reach Charlie Hurt at churt@washingtontimes.com or @charleshurt on Twitter

Kayleigh McEnany scolds media for lack of ‘journalistic curiosity’ in Flynn case

White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany scolded reporters on Friday for its “lack of journalistic curiosity” in what the Trump administration believes to be the miscarriage of justice in the criminal case surrounding former national security advisor Michael Flynn. CBS News Radio correspondent Steven Portnoy began his line of questioning by invoking remarks President Trump made in a recent interview where he suggested that people “should be jailed” for the “very obvious crime” that was committed against Flynn. “You’re an attorney and the president’s spokesperson. Perhaps you could lay out the elements of this crime. What crime was committed and in what way?” Portnoy asked. “I assume you’re referring to the Obama administration and the unmasking,” McEnany responded. “What the president calls ‘Obamagate,’ what is it? What are the elements of that crime?” Portnoy clarified. “Yeah, I’m really glad you asked because there hasn’t been a lot of journalistic curiosity on this front. And I’m very glad that you asked this question,” the press secretary told Portnoy. McEnany first began by pointing to the “number of questions” that were raised by the “actions” the Obama administration, listing the Democratic National Committee-funded Steele dossier and its involvement in the FISA warrants that were granted to surveil former Trump campaign advisor Carter Page \as well as the unmasking of Flynn by top Obama officials during the transition period between November 2016 and January 2017. She then noted the Oval Office meeting that took place just days before Trump’s inauguration between President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, and acting Attorney General Sally Yates, who McEnany stressed “learned” about the unmasking from Obama and not from the Justice Department. “We know that there was a lot of wrongdoing in the case of Michael Flynn. The FBI notes, for instance, that said, ‘Should we,’ quote, ‘get him to lie,’ as they pontificated their strategy,” McEnany continued. “We know that the identity of this three-decade general was leaked to the press — a criminal leak to the press of his identity in violation of his Fourth Amendment rights. These are very serious questions. They’ve been ignored by the media for far too long. And I’m very glad that I think that is the second question that I have fielded on Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, because justice does matter. Those questions, they matter.” Portnoy then asked what specifically was the “crime,” which McEnany reiterated was the leaking of Flynn’s name to the press in January 2017. She then laid out other moments from Obama officials. “if you want to start talking about wrongdoing in the administration, I’m happy to go through Andy McCabe leaking to The Wall Street Journal and then lying about it, happy to talk about James Clapper lying before Congress, saying the NSA does not monitor phone calls. That was an inaccuracy, to say the least, if not a lie,” McEnany listed. “And John Brennan telling Congress that the bogus Steele dossier played no role in the Russia probe, when, in fact, we know it did and was the basis of attaining FISA warrants. So there’s a lot of mistruths there that were said, many of them under oath, so I would point you to those and the many other real questions that I hope you all will pursue.” The CBS News Radio reporter then pressed McEnany if the individuals she listed were the people the president thought should be “in jail,” but she pushed back, insisting that journalists should look into what she “laid out.” “That is, after all, the job of reporters, to answer the very questions that I’ve laid out, and I hope you guys will take the time to do it,” McEnany told Portnoy.

HAHAHA!!!  Absolutely AWESOME!!!  We’re really enjoying Kayleigh’s press beatdowns at the White House.  She takes these snotty, self-righteous, arrogant, members of the dominantly liberal mainstream media who have what they think are clever gotcha questions, which are really just designed to validate their already predetermined liberally spun anti-Trump narratives, and she turns the tables on them and makes them look like the fools they are.  But, she does it with class, and a smile; basically bitch-slaps them and then gives them a kiss, smiles, and takes the next question.  In this exchange from Friday afternoon, Kayleigh does just that to Steven Portnoy from CBS radio, and it was a beautiful thing to behold.  To see the exchange, and her extended comments, click on the text above…and pop some popcorn.  Great job Kayleigh!!     🙂

Democrats’ coronavirus bill would eliminate states’ voter ID requirement

Tucked inside House Democrats’ new coronavirus bill is language that would create a loophole in states’ voter ID requirements, allowing people to cast ballots without having to prove who they are. While the crux of the bill, revealed Tuesday, is a massive injection of taxpayer aid for states, localities and federal agencies dealing with the virus, Democrats also tackled some of their long-standing political goals. One section of the bill would require states to allow at least 15 days of in-person early voting before Election Day this year, and to also allow voting by mail for any reason, overriding states that have more limited policies. The new bill would also require that absentee ballots be counted if they arrive up to 10 days after Election Day. And the legislation says that states that require voter IDs to cast a ballot must allow voters to meet the requirement by self-certifying to their own identity. The National Conference of State Legislatures says 36 states have some voter ID requirement. About a half dozen of those are “strict” photo ID laws, requiring someone who wants to cast a ballot without photo ID to return with proof within three days for their ballot to be counted.

More liberal agenda nonsense that has NOTHING to do with public health or displaced Americans who are unemployed.  This is just a way for House Democrats to further their anti Voter ID law agenda….and push for more mail-in voting, which of course, is insane.  Voter ID is the ONLY way to prevent voter fraud.  Naturally, Democrats who want more illegal aliens voting for them, want voter ID done away with.   Hopefully, the Senate won’t let this pass.  We need voter ID laws now more than ever.

Gregg Jarrett: Ending Michael Flynn prosecution exposes and destroys Trump-Russia collusion hoax

The collusion house of cards has finally and fully collapsed. In a stunning turn of events Thursday, the Justice Department dropped its case against former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn. Exculpatory documents concealed by the FBI and federal prosecutors for more than three years showed that the retired Army lieutenant general never lied or committed a crime. The FBI knew Flynn did not collude with Russians. He is a patriot, not a traitor. The notion that candidate Donald Trump conspired with Moscow to steal the 2016 presidential election was always an implausible phantasm built on a foundation of Russian disinformation commissioned by the Hillary Clinton campaign and Democrats. The malevolent James Comey, fired director of the FBI, knew this but it didn’t deter him. He and his lieutenants sedulously stacked the cards, one by one, against Trump by exploiting the bogus allegations and pursuing an illicit investigation designed to drive him from office. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and his sycophants in the media propagated the Russia hoax by insisting there was “solid evidence” that Trump was a secret Kremlin asset and predicting the imminent demise of his presidency. Except no such evidence ever existed. Collusion was nothing more than an illusion and a delusion. Tragically, people like Flynn became collateral damage amid the carnage of corruption, dishonesty, abuse and injustice. But the weight of all the lies and propaganda has inexorably toppled the house of cards in a slow-motion crash. I have long argued in numerous columns and two books that the retired Army lieutenant general was set up and framed by Comey, FBI Assistant Director Andrew McCabe and disgraced FBI agent Peter Strzok. They invented a perjury trap under false pretenses and deceived Flynn. Their goal was “to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired.” They knew Flynn was innocent – and hidden records proved it. The two agents who interviewed him in January 2017 concluded “that Flynn was not lying.” Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his team of partisan prosecutors also knew Flynn was not lying, but they didn’t care. Utilizing the full force of the federal government and their unlimited resources, they intimidated and bullied an innocent man into pleading guilty to making a false statement. To accomplish this, they threatened to criminally charge Flynn’s son unless the father capitulated to their demands. That aspect of the coerced plea was hidden from the court when Flynn threw in the towel. He was financially ruined and his reputation shattered. He was forced to sell his home. Thanks to the intrepid work of Flynn’s new counsel, Sidney Powell, and a review of the case ordered by Attorney General William Barr, the ugly and unconscionable actions of the FBI and Mueller’s hit squad were uncovered and exposed. The distinguished retired three-star general has now been vindicated. In a recent column, I wrote that Flynn became “the victim of one of the worst miscarriages of justice in modern times” and “he should sue the very people and government that persecuted him under the pretext of a legitimate prosecution. Let the litigation begin. Damages should run into the millions of dollars. Flynn deserves it. And the Justice Department should now consider whether crimes were committed by those who deliberately obscured the truth and arguably obstructed justice. Another card that fell this week came from the Office of Director of National Intelligence. The office notified Schiff that transcribed interviews of 53 witnesses who appeared behind closed doors before the House Intelligence Committee in 2017 and 2018 would be released to Congress and the public, despite Schiff’s best efforts for more than two years to bury the testimony. Why would the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, who has demanded transparency from Trump, want to hide the truth about him? Because the declassified 6,000 pages produced not a scintilla of collusion evidence. Zero. Of course, Intelligence Committee Chairman Schiff knew this all along, since he questioned the witnesses. He just didn’t want the American public to know it, inasmuch as it completely undermined his false collusion narrative. “Schiff is in panic mode,” a senior administration official told Fox News. Not a single witness provided any evidence of collusion, according to two sources familiar with the transcripts. The transcripts utterly discredit Schiff and expose him as a poseur. For years during television appearances, Schiff professed to have uncovered the hobgoblin of a grand conspiracy involving Trump. Yet, he refused to offer any proof. He pretended that he was privy to evidence that he did not have. As I wrote in my book “Witch Hunt: The Story of the Greatest Mass Delusion in American Political History: “The more Democrats and the media worked in concert to advance their hallucination that Trump had colluded with Russia, the more audacious Schiff became in his public denouncements of the president. He frequently insinuated that he had special access to damning information that few others could procure. Even after the House Intelligence Committee issued its majority investigative report concluding that it had all been a hoax, Schiff announced, ‘I can certainly say with confidence that there is significant evidence of collusion between the campaign and Russia.’ He produced no such evidence because it did not exist.” On CBS’ “Face the Nation,” Schiff ventured that Trump “may be the first president in quite some time to face the real prospect of jail time.” This claim was ludicrous, of course. Yet, Schiff was so heavily invested in the scam and the celebrity it brought him that there was no reversing course. He knew it was untrue. But like a guy with a counterfeit bill, he kept trying to pass it off to others. Schiff is living proof that the truth always has a nemesis. Still another card fell this week when the Justice Department belatedly made public the unredacted version of the so-called “scope memo” penned by then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein in August 2017 detailing the scope of Mueller’s Russia investigation. Rosenstein authorized Mueller to specifically target Trump campaign aide Carter Page for “colluding with Russian government officials with respect to the Russian government’s efforts to interfere with the 2016 election for President of the United States.” However, Rosenstein already knew that these allegations, based on the anti-Trump “dossier” –composed by ex-British spy Christopher Steele – had been discredited by the FBI. Seven months earlier, bureau agents had located Steele’s primary source of information. That source debunked the “dossier” as exaggerations and fabrications, according to the findings of Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz. At that point, the FBI should have shut down its probe. Instead, Comey persisted. When Comey was fired in May 2017, Rosenstein appointed Mueller to launch a new investigation – even though the deputy attorney general well knew there was no credible evidence that supported the appointment of a special counsel under federal regulations. Mueller knew this as well, since he was given the FBI files. On “Hannity” on Fox News on Wednesday, Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., stated that “the legal foundation to justify Mueller’s appointment in my view does not exist. … That’s why this (scope) memo is so important.” Graham is correct. The Mueller investigation was illegitimate from the outset, even though it eventually found no evidence of a collusion conspiracy. Rosenstein misconstrued – and thereby misused – the special counsel regulations. An “articulable criminal act” must first be identified. It must antecede the appointment, not vice versa. But when Mueller was appointed, the FBI had developed no such evidence. That was confirmed by Steele’s source, as well as the subsequent testimony of Comey and former FBI lawyer Lisa Page. The evidentiary premise of a crime was conspicuously missing. Thus, Mueller began his investigation in search of a crime, reversing the legal process mandated under the regulations. None of this seemed to matter to Rosenstein. He was determined to get rid of Trump. Evidence shows he plotted to secretly record the president and then use the recording as evidence to try to remove the president from office under the 25th Amendment. As a result, Rosenstein should have been disqualified from any involvement in the special counsel case. It was not possible for someone so noticeably antagonistic to the president to be an unbiased and neutral party overseeing that investigation. Not only was the naming of a special counsel unauthorized, but the FBI’s original investigation launched in July 2016 was improper. In an interview on Fox News last month, Attorney General William Barr called the three-year Russia probe “one of the greatest travesties in American history.” Barr made it abundantly clear that it should never have happened. He said: “Without any basis, they started this investigation of his (Trump’s) campaign, and even more concerning, actually is what happened after the campaign, (There was) a whole pattern of events while he was president … to sabotage the presidency … or at least have the effect of sabotaging the presidency.” Barr has vowed “to get to the bottom of it.” With his appointment of Connecticut U.S. Attorney John Durham, the attorney general has committed his department to holding individuals accountable. “If people broke the law, and we can establish that with the evidence, they will be prosecuted,” Barr promised. There is no doubt that Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Rosenstein, Schiff and a great many others were intimately involved in the scheme to sabotage Trump. They managed to initiate the Trump investigation with no evidence of a crime and then convince the country that an unparalleled investigation was necessary. Their phony collusion narrative was a conspiracy in and of itself, contrived as a political instrument and then weaponized by unscrupulous government officials. Now that their house of cards has collapsed, it is time for a reckoning.

Indeed..  LTG Michael Flynn, Ret., has been 100% exonerated, and this whole so-called Russia “collusion” has been proven to have been a complete hoax on the American people by corrupt officials at the FBI from James Comey on down, Hillary Clinton (and her campaign), the DNC, members of the dominantly liberal mainstream media, and many Democrat politicians hell bent on bringing down Trump no matter the cost.  And, in the process, lots of these people committed crimes.  Now it’s time for payback.  Hopefully Sidney Powell and the rest of Flynn’s very capable legal team are working on that.  The man is owed millions..and that’s just the civil side of things.  Lots of these folks should go to jail.  We’ll, of course, be keeping a close eye on this developing story.  Thanks to Gregg Jarrett for his spot on legal analysis.  He was one of the few legal commentators in the media that has been right about this story all along.

Gregg is a Fox News legal analyst and commentator, and formerly worked as a defense attorney and adjunct law professor. He is the author of the No. 1 New York Times best-selling book “The Russia Hoax: The Illicit Scheme to Clear Hillary Clinton and Frame Donald Trump.” His latest book is the New York Times bestseller “Witch Hunt: The Story of the Greatest Mass Delusion in American Political History

Opinion/Analysis: COVID-19 threatens U.S. election integrity

For the first time in months, Democrats are looking with anticipation and excitement to November’s presidential election — and it has nothing to do with their dismal candidate, Joe Biden. It’s because of COVID-19 and the chance to do some heavy Election Day damage. If at first you don’t succeed — right? Democrats have kept “Toppling America’s Electoral System” on their list of most-desired for years, with only the spottiest of successes to show for it. Oh, there have been some wins on open borders that have brought in bunches of desperate and dependent low-information voter types, the kind who came from socialist countries and now want America to adopt the same entitlement mindset and income redistribution plans that destroyed the nations they fled. But that’s proven a slow-going route to boosting Democrat numbers at the ballot boxes; hardly the stuff of radical overnight national change. There have been some wins at the state level that have seen leftists let illegals obtain drivers’ licenses and identification cards that in turn prove valuable platforms toward corrupting the present vote, as well as at laying the groundwork for scooping up scores of future loyal Democrat voters. But again, it’s slow-going. But now comes COVID-19. Now comes a real fear-borne disease that can really push the panic buttons, and just in time for November, no less. “Coronavirus Drives States To Pilot Internet Voting,” NPR reported. Ah, the dream of the Democrats dawns. Several states, due to social distancing orders and stay-at-home guidance from governors and other members of the government, have implemented electronic, internet-based voting. “Democrat and GOP leaders are considering online voting in light of coronavirus for party elections,” Salon reported back in March. Considerations haven’t much shifted in the weeks that followed. “NJ, Pa. Push for Online, Mail-in Voting Amid Coronavirus Outbreak,” NBC10 Philadelphia reported last week. “Delaware will allow voters with disabilities to return their ballots electronically in its primary election next month, becoming the second U.S. state to do so,” NPR also just reported. How about that, hackers? Russian collusion for real this time? The idea is ripe for corruption. Online votes can be easily changed — or surveilled. They can be outright deleted from the system. And worse, they can be manipulated without anyone ever catching on to the manipulation — meaning, the fraud can easily lead to a compromised election that is never discovered, never addressed, never righted and fixed. America just can’t take the chance; election integrity is too important to risk. And mark my words, once Democrats win concessions on in-person voter in favor of online balloting, it won’t be long before they win on the fate of the Electoral College. The left has pushed for a crumbling of this all-important election protection for years because they know once electors are removed from the equation, the White House goes to the voters in the more heavily populated liberal enclaves of the country — the far-left areas on the East and West Coasts, and in the largely liberal populations in America’s cities. It becomes a real “tyranny of the majority” system, as Heritage Foundation noted. Flyover country, largely conservative, largely Republican, largely limited government in ideological bent, would fall under “forgotten” territory — largely unrepresented in the nation’s highest political halls. “A majority of Democratic voters, 60 percent, said they supported abolishing the Electoral College and allowing whoever receives the most votes nationwide to become president,” The Hill reported, back in 2019. “Just 20 percent said they wanted to keep the current system. … Republicans … 64 percent … [said] they wanted to retain it.” There’s a reason for that. And if the Electoral College is a concept of our Founding Fathers that maintains election integrity, even as it serves a purpose for truer representation of the people — then its preservation is crucial to keeping the country free. Online voting is a way for Democrats to corrupt the current system, compromise its integrity and then, with expressions of dismay at the corrupted system, demand the need for reform — for “one person, one vote” reform, for “every vote matters” reform. That’s the language used by the Kill Electoral College crowd. Once voting integrity is compromised, it opens the door for even more compromise. Widespread online voting will soon enough lead to a corrupted voting process — will soon enough lead to the dismantling of the Electoral College. And that will soon enough lead to an American government dominated entirely by far left Democrats. Let’s not let the disease of COVID-19 turn into a diseased election system.

Agreed!!  Thanks Cheryl!  Cheryl Chumley is the author of that spot-on op/ed.  She can be reached at on Twitter, @ckchumley

Trump says new FBI notes are ‘total exoneration’ for Flynn

President Trump said Thursday newly revealed FBI notes “totally exonerate” former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn on his conviction of lying to the FBI. “He’s in the process of being exonerated,” Mr. Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. “That [note] is total exoneration. When you read the notes, how could you do anything else?” Bombshell documents unsealed Wednesday night revealed that top FBI officials viewed the goal of interviewing Flynn in 2017 was to “get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired.” A handwritten note disclosed that agents wanted to get Flynn to “admit breaking the Logan Act,” which restricts communication between private citizens and foreign governments, and catch him in a lie. The president said Flynn was a victim of “dirty cops.” “These were dirty, filthy cops at the top of the FBI, and you know the names better than I do. And they were dishonest people,” Mr. Trump said. “Gen. Flynn is a fine man. You don’t get to where he is by being bad. The dirty cops came in.” Mr. Trump fired Flynn a month after taking office, saying he had misled Vice President Mike Pence on the extent of his contacts with Russian officials during the presidential transition. Asked Thursday whether he regretted firing Flynn, the president said, “I wish I had [brought him back], with all the information. This is terrible.” He also blamed CNN for helping to “destroy” Flynn and said he hopes the network “is going to give him a fair shake.”

Don’t hold your breath, Mr. President..

Nancy Pelosi Pushing for Leftist Provisions in Phase Four Coronavirus Bill

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said on Wednesday that she hopes that Democrats can get more Democrat provisions in a phase four coronavirus package. Anderson Cooper asked Pelosi what she thought of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-KY) contention that Congress should wait to see how the phase three coronavirus response package impacts the pandemic before moving to a phase four bill. In response, Pelosi admitted that Democrats were not able to obtain many Democrat provisions in the phase three coronavirus bill drafted by Senate Republicans. “We couldn’t get everything we wanted in the other bill, let’s begin to go down this path,” Pelosi said. Pelosi’s jockeying for a phase four coronavirus response bill appears to be a move to stuff more leftist special interests in the bill. Despite Pelosi’s negotiations with McConnell and the White House on the phase three coronavirus package, she moved to push her own stage three bill that would contain more Democrat provisions. Democrat Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-SC) said in February regarding the Democrat phase three bill, “This is a tremendous opportunity to restructure things to fit our vision.” The Pelosi coronavirus bill included: Increased fuel emissions standards for airlines receiving coronavirus assistance funds. Student loans payments up to $10,000 Same-day voter registration, early voting, voting by mail, and ballot harvesting Preserving collective bargaining for unions Expansion of wind and solar tax credits Requirements for federal and corporate racial diversity data A Post Office bailout Automatic extension of nonimmigrant visas Restricting colleges from providing information about citizenship status Funds for Planned Parenthood $300,000,000 for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which produces PBS to “prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus.” $278,000,000 for the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) $500,000,000 for the Institute for Museum and Library Services $35,000,000 for the John F. Kennedy Center However, despite Pelosi’s move to push her own bill, she ended up supporting McConnell’s phase three bill. Due to Senate Republicans’ victory over Pelosi, the Republican Party was able to block many leftist provisions in the phase three bill including: Money for Planned Parenthood. Green New Deal Federal Mandates for Early and Mail Voting Postal Service Bailout DHS Funding Restrictions. “If Chuck Schumer had his way, he would have eliminated the direct checks,” one Senate Republican aide said…

We are disgusted by Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) persistent effort to use this national crisis to push her liberal political agenda and pass on the cost to hurting Americans.  She’s pulling this bs while people are being laid off and can’t pay their bills.  But, come hell or highwater, she’s gonna make us pay for AOC’s “Green New Deal,” millions for the Kennedy Center, millions for PBS/NPR, Planned Parenthood, and other ridiculous liberal nonsense that has NOTHING to do with helping hurting Americans around the country.  Sen. Kennedy (R-LA) calls this political “porn.”  Let’s all email our members of Congress and both U,S. Senators and let them know we don’t want them to pack this crap into the next bill.

Rep. Jim Jordan demands DOJ IG Michael Horowitz to testify in wake of second damning FISA report

The top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday demanded the panel hold a hearing with Justice Department Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz after his latest missive finding the FBI bungled scores of warrant applications to surveil Americans. Rep. Jim Jordan sent a letter to Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, New York Democrat, saying lawmakers need to hear from Mr. Horowitz as the debate rages in Washington about whether to limit the FBI’s surveillance powers under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). “The committee must not allow the FBI’s extraordinary power to electronically surveil Americans to be so haphazardly rubber-stamped with incorrect, unsubstantiated or erroneous supporting information,” wrote Mr. Jordan, Ohio Republican. On Tuesday, Mr. Horowitz released the preliminary results of his team’s review of 29 FISA applications the FBI had submitted to obtain surveillance warrants on U.S. citizens. Every one of the 29 applications reviewed did not include supporting materials to back up the FBI’s allegations against their surveillance targets. And in some cases, the FBI couldn’t find the backup files at all or was unsure if they ever existed. In all 25 cases in which the files were available for review, Mr.Horowitz found “apparent errors or inadequately supported facts.” Mr. Jordan said the latest findings highlight the need to question the inspector general. “Because of the pervasiveness and seriousness of the FISA application deficiencies — and the pending reauthorization of FISA — we renew our request that you invite Inspector General Michael Horowitz to testify at a public hearing promptly when the House returns to session,” he wrote. House Republicans have been calling for a hearing with Mr. Horowitz since last December when he released a scathing report about the FBI’s bungling of a surveillance warrant to spy on former Trump campaign aide Carter Page. So far, Mr. Nadler has resisted calls to hear from the inspector general. Mr. Horowitz has testified before two Senate committees about the Page report.

Of COURSE Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-NY) doesn’t want to call the IG before his committee.  He doesn’t want any of this to come to light which very likely could make his side look bad in an election year.

Sen. Chuck Schumer Hit with Ethics Complaints for Threat to SCOTUS Justices

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) faces multiple ethics complaints for threatening Supreme Court Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch on the steps of the high court. Schumer declared at a Center for Reproductive Rights rally last Wednesday that the two conservative judges will “pay the price” if they vote against pro-choice advocates in a case regarding a Louisiana abortion law. “Over the last three years, women’s reproductive rights have come under attack in a way we haven’t seen in modern history. From Louisiana, to Missouri, to Texas, Republican legislatures are waging a war on women, all women, and they’re taking away fundamental rights,” he warned. “I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you, if you go forward with these awful decisions.” Following blowback from Republicans, the New York Democrat offered a non-apology, saying he “shouldn’t have used the words I did” while claiming conservatives were “manufacturing outrage” over the statement. On Friday, the National Legal Policy Center filed complaints against Schumer with both the Senate Ethics Committee and New York bar. “It strains credulity to believe that, regardless of his Brooklyn pedigree, Sen. Schumer, who is a Harvard-educated lawyer, Senator minority leader, and vocal opponent of both Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, did not intend to choose the exact words he spoke as he turned and pointed to the Supreme Court behind him to further emphasize his point,” the NLPC’s complaint reads. “In short, his non-apology is a lame excuse for inexcusable conduct.” The Landmark Legal Foundation, which is chaired by conservative talk radio host Mark Levin, also submitted a complaint to the upper chamber’s ethics panel Thursday. “The Senate must immediately reprimand, if not censure, Sen. Schumer for his outrageous and dangerous attack on Supreme Court Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh,” said the complaint, alleging that the lawmaker’s comments could amount to “improper conduct which may reflect upon the Senate.” In a separate complaint, attorney Joseph Gioconda wrote to New York’s Grievance Committee for the Second Judicial District: “At a minimum, Attorney/Senator Schumer’s statements appear to be improper conduct that reflects upon his character and fitness to practice law in New York.” Schumer’s remarks prompted a rare rebuke by Supreme Court Justice John Roberts, who called the New York Democrats’ threat both “inappropriate” and “dangerous.” “Justices know that criticism comes with the territory, but threatening statements of this sort from the highest levels of government are not only inappropriate, they are dangerous. All Members of the Court will continue to do their job, without fear or favor, from whatever quarter,” he said. President Donald Trump also took aim at Schumer, calling for him to face “severe” punishment. “This is a direct & dangerous threat to the U.S. Supreme Court by Schumer. If a Republican did this, he or she would be arrested, or impeached. Serious action MUST be taken NOW!” the president tweeted. “There can be few things worse in a civilized, law abiding nation, than a United States Senator openly, and for all to see and hear, threatening the Supreme Court or its Justices. This is what Chuck Schumer just did. He must pay a severe price for this!” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) introduced a motion last Thursday to censure Schumer, with the support of 14 other Republican senators. “Senator Schumer has acknowledged that threatening statements can increase the dangers of violence against government officials when he stated on June 15, 2017, following the attempted murder of several elected Members of Congress, ‘We would all be wise to reflect on the importance of civility in our [N]ation’s politics’ and that ‘the level of nastiness, vitriol, and hate that has seeped into our politics must be excised,’ the resolution reads.

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) is FINALLY being called to the carpet for his outrageous, and  WAY over-the-top threatening remarks he made on the steps of the Supreme Court while they were literally in session.  Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) is absolutely right in calling for him to be censured by the Senate, and we support his efforts and call on more Senate Republicans to sign on to his motion.  That’s the very least that happen from the Senate’s side.  And, hopefully these complaints to the NY state Bar and elsewhere will bear fruit.   Most in D.C. have grown accustomed to Chuck’s obnoxious grandstanding, and accept him for what he is; a duplicitous, hypocritical, self-serving, arrogant, obnoxious, extremely liberal, elitist blowhard who loves to talk down to the rest of us peasants over his reading glasses.   But, this time he crossed a line, and needs to be held to account.  As was mentioned in the article, he is a Harvard-educated attorney, and has been in politics for a VERY long time.  What he said on those steps he was reading…and he knew EXACTLY what he was saying.  So, the Senate, and the NY State Bar shouldn’t accept his bs and spin as he tries to dance around it.  He needs to be formally held to account and made and example of.  If you agree, the email BOTH of your U.S. Senators, and tell them you want Chuck to be censured.