Friday, December 8, 2017


Hint: There are Russians and Democrats INVOLVED.

As I had explained in my post last Sunday, (Dec. 3rd), House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes had run out of patience with Robert Mueller's stall-tactics about "demoted" FBI hot shot Peter Strzok.  Nunes had formally requested information on August 24th with a subpoena, and Mueller's team has yet to respond. 

But, let’s digress for just a moment, (actually, one minute-fifty-four seconds), and recall how a Democratic Presidential Candidate---not placed under oath---managed to have thousands of emails destroyed “without her knowledge” and is subsequently absolved of any "intentional" wrong-doing.

In this extremely short video clip, while questioning former FBI Director James Comey, Congressional Representative Jim Jordan, (yes, he’s a Republican), points out---in context---to Mr. Comey exactly what Hillary Clinton did as a result of destroying her emails while obstructing an ongoing investigation.  Keep in mind, according to Comey's boss, Loretta Lynch, this whole investigation is only "a matter". July 7th, 2016. (link to this video):

As you can see from this video, (above), and the following two, Jim Jordan seems to ask questions these people either don't have the answers to, or refuse to answer because some one else has that authority---not Comey, not Sessions, and now, not Wray.  This tactic of passing the buck has got to stop.

Then, in this video testimony, published November 14th, 2017, Jim Jordan questions Attorney General Jeff Sessions about the events that took place in the summer of the 2016 Presidential race, specifically, about Fusion GPS, Uranium One, now fired FBI Director Comey's leaking of information to the New York Times, (via a professor friend), which triggers the appointment of a Special Counsel. (link to this video):

At first, Jeff Sessions tells Jim Jordan he can't divulge certain facts and conversations stating, "I'm not able to answer that".  Then, when Jordan asked Sessions for information on if and who is investigating leaks to CNN, again, Sessions says he's not able to divulge these answers because it's now into the investigative powers of the Special Council.  Later in this conversation, Sessions actually gets quite indignant with Jordan explaining how FACTS are necessary to the consideration of a second special council.

Needless to say, if you watch this video a second time, you can't help but get more pissed at Sessions' continued stone-walling while pretending to be totally ignorant of the facts. 

Fast forward to yesterday, (December 7th), and in Jim Jordan's questioning of now FBI Director Christopher Wray, one thing seems to be crystal clear---Jim Jordan is almost the only person to know the facts, present them to the people, and expects both answers and actions. (link to this video):

Once again, the focus in this conversation brings us back to that pesky dossier.  Jordan is asking for two specific answers---who prepared and submitted the application to the FISA courts, and was the dossier "document" part of that application?

Christopher Wray's response could have been read right out of a "How to be an FBI Director's" manual, literally filled with the same damned answers both Comey and Sessions gave---WE DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO ANSWER THAT.

Bottom Line: Did Peter Strzok, while representing the FBI, present this dossier---as a credible document---to the FISA courts to obtain a search warrant allowing the FBI, (and other intelligence agencies), to surveil, wire-tap, and unmask American Citizens?

Further, (and this could be a far more egregious and illegal undertaking), was the FBI colluding with the DNC in obtaining this warrant---for the purpose of using this material against a Presidential Candidate?

Current FBI Director Christopher Wray, (and by extension, Attorney General Jeff Sessions) had better think long and hard about their reason to not divulge this information to the House Intelligence Committee, and more importantly, to the Citizens of the United States of America.

The Public has every right to know if departments within the Federal Government are committing collusion and corruption by purposely refusing to reveal these facts from their electors.

Monday, December 4, 2017

Renowned Liberal Lawyer Defends Trump’s Constitutional Rights and Authorities---Blowing Feinstein’s and the Media’s False Narratives out of the water.

Editor's note: This conversation took place this morning, (12/04/17), on Fox & Friends between Brian Kilmeade and Liberal Professor Alan Dershowitz.  When the video becomes available, I will post it in this thread.

Dershowitz’s response to Feinstein’s comments about President Trump on Meet the Press, saying “I think the investigative committees are putting a case together for obstruction of justice.”

Alan Dershowitz:  Senator Feinstein simply doesn’t know what she’s talking about---there is no obstruction of justice when a President fires his FBI director, (Comey), or any one else, or to instruct his justice department to investigate anyone---it’s within his constitutional authority to do so, and I hope Mueller doesn’t make this mistake, or he will be causing a constitutional crisis.

Dershowitz goes on to cite precedence, ie, other Presidents who have done the same thing and were NEVER questioned about their constitutional authority.

Dershowitz also says the fact that Trump has not exercised his authority to pardon Flynn suggest there’s no obstruction of justice going on.  He also said Trump had every right to instruct Flynn, (while in the transition team), to delay the sanctions Obama had imposed against Russia---it’s his right to do so, and it is not obstruction.

(Note: all of Dershowitz’s statements were paraphrased, but almost word for word)

Update---Video Added

Sunday, December 3, 2017


"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!" (Sir Walter Scott, 1808)

And, according to the Washington Examiner's Byron Scott, there's a whole bunch of deception going on.  And Devin Nunes has had enough of it:

Byron York: Nunes blows up, threatens contempt after FBI stonewalls House on Russia investigator demoted for anti-Trump bias
by Byron York | Dec 2, 2017, 6:38 PM  

"House Intelligence Committee chairman Devin Nunes has issued an angry demand to the FBI and Department of Justice to explain why they kept the committee in the dark over the reason Special Counsel Robert Mueller kicked a key supervising FBI agent off the Trump-Russia investigation.

Stories in both the Washington Post and New York Times on Saturday reported that Peter Strzok, who played a key role in the original FBI investigation into the Trump-Russia matter, and then a key role in Mueller's investigation, and who earlier had played an equally critical role in the FBI's Hillary Clinton email investigation, was reassigned out of the Mueller office because of anti-Trump texts he exchanged with a top FBI lawyer, Lisa Page, with whom Strzok was having an extramarital affair. Strzok was transferred to the FBI's human resources office — an obvious demotion -- in July.

The Post reported that Strzok and Page exchanged text messages that "expressed anti-Trump sentiments and other comments that appeared to favor Clinton."

York goes on to explain how Nunes was unaware of this little "text affair", and had been asking the Mueller team for information since August 24th with a subpoena.  The subpoena also directly asked for information on the Trump Dossier---all unanswered by the FBI and the DOJ.  York lays out a timeline of where Nune's committee continues to ask for information on Strzok, and how each time receives no response.

What Nunes did get came from, (or was leaked to), the New York Times and the Washington Post, who both wrote that this demotion of Strzok might hurt Mueller's credibility while helping President Trump:

"Among federal law enforcement officials, there is great concern that exposure of the texts they exchanged may be used by the president and his defenders to attack the credibility of the Mueller probe and the FBI more broadly," the Post reported. The Times reported that "the existence of the text messages is likely to fuel claims by Mr. Trump that he is the target of a witch hunt."

What it did fuel was a stern response from Nunes:

"By hiding from Congress, and from the American people, documented political bias by a key FBI head investigator for both the Russia collusion probe and the Clinton email investigation, the FBI and DOJ engaged in a willful attempt to thwart Congress' constitutional oversight responsibility," Nunes said in a statement Saturday afternoon. "This is part of a months-long pattern by the DOJ and FBI of stonewalling and obstructing this committee's oversight work, particularly oversight of their use of the Steele dossier. At this point, these agencies should be investigating themselves."

(Read the full Byron York story here to see the whole reason Nunes is deservedly pissed off)

Who would have thunk that a little old affair, a few texts, and an acknowledged Trump-Hater would get in the way of a Special Prosecutor's best laid plans?

Right at the moment, (sincere or not), Mueller's credibility rates about a 2 on the scale of 1-10.  Throw in the "fact" that now it turns out Flynn was under the orders of Obama's administration to "freely converse" with any foreign government entity---including Russian officials---Mueller's, and the Liberal Media's supposed fall guy, (that was supposed to implicate Trump surrogates and possibly even the President)---the general may be getting walking papers or a mild sentence, rather than becoming the "Trump Card". 

I'd also note that from reading this story, I get the impression Nunes and his team are pushing their powers to the edge, forcing Mueller to either announce prematurely he's got nothing on Trump and/or the investigation's going to wrap up soon.  Either way, if one more of Mueller's "team of Trump-hating Democrats" he hired to do his "dirty work" gets publicly outed as biased against the President, Mueller might as well resign.

One thing is certain.............Putin must be laughing his ass off.

Trump's got to be chuckling a bit too.  

Oh My!  Collusion!!!

Thursday, November 30, 2017

Susan Collins Has All the Cards----For Now

Corker, Collins, and Flake.  Remember those names.  It takes three Republican Senators to hold up one of the most important pieces of legislation in the Republican Party’s history, and these three know it.

Two, (Corker and Flake), are retiring and have nothing to lose in screwing up the bill.  Susan Collins (R-Maine), who caters to liberal thinking more often than not, also knows that as long as the three of them remain “no’s” together, they’ve got the entire Republican Senate by the balls----and, she’s squeezing them tighter than than a bull's asshole in fly season.

All Collins wants? Two years of ObamaCare subsidies and “a host of other issues”:

“Collins has been pushing for lawmakers to pass Alexander-Murray, which provides two years of ObamaCare cost-sharing reduction payments, as well as her legislation with Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) that would provide funding for "reinsurance" programs aimed at bringing down premiums.

Passing both bills, Collins argues, is necessary after a repeal of ObamaCare's individual insurance mandate was included in the tax bill. She noted that the Collins-Nelson measure is also part of the deal.

"I still would prefer that the individual mandate [repeal] were not in the bill. ... It complicates this whole issue and when you pull one piece of the Affordable Care Act out it has an impact on premiums and that's why Alexander-Murray and Collins-Nelson are so important," she said.”  (LINK)

As you can see, Mz. Collins is still hanging onto the dream of saving ObamaCare, even though the program is on its last legs.  She wants it all…………or nothing, or, it's a big fat no.

Then again, if either Flake or Corker decide to “play their hands” ahead of her, McConnell can tell Collins to go pound sand.

All the Republicans need is just ONE VOTE from one of them to hit the 50, and VP Pence gets all the glory, errr breaks the tie, sending this bill to conference.

McConnell should at least check with both Corker and Flake to see if their cost/price might be a little cheaper than Collins’ demands.  Again, it only takes one to break Collins’ stranglehold on the rest of the Republican Senate.

It’s “Let’s Make a Deal” Time.

(cross-posted at The Sparta Report)

Tuesday, November 28, 2017


President Trump held a meeting today to start  negotiations for the Dec. 8 government funding deadline.  Only one problem; Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi decided to not show up for the meeting.

"They have been all talk and no action," Trump said. "Now it's even worse. It's not even talk."

The reason Chuck and Nancy gave for not showing up?  They were offended by Trump's tweet earlier in the day:

"Meeting with 'Chuck and Nancy' today about keeping government open and working. Problem is they want illegal immigrants flooding into our Country unchecked, are weak on Crime and want to substantially RAISE Taxes. I don't see a deal!"

Trump also said at the meeting he wasn't surprised by their no-show, since "we're lowering taxes and all the Democrats want to do is raise taxes and flood the country with illegal immigrants".

The next thing these cowardly Democrats will try to do, is shut down the government and point their fingers at Trump.  Not going to work this time kids.

Monday, November 27, 2017