TheFrontPageCover
~ Featuring ~
The Incredible Narcissism 
of liar-Hillary and Comey
by Daniel Greenfield
.
Did Iran Really Threaten to Expose 
Those They Paid Bribes to For Nuke Deal?
{ rickwells.us } ~ The old saying goes, “there is no honor among thieves,” and the participants in the Iran nuclear agreement... crafting and force feeding to the world are proving the adage applies to scoundrels of every variety, including traitors, racketeers and extortionists. We would all love to see the despicable sellouts involved in shoving the Iran nuclear agreement revealed as the traitors we all believe them to be, but some of the details in this viral tweet that is being picked up by many independent news sources doesn’t seem to add up the way it’s being portrayed. The cookie-cutter articles littering the internet with the same text time after time state an unsourced quotation from a supposed Iranian official, a tweet that references a senior adviser of “H. J. Ansari Zarif.” Only one Zarif works in a prominent position in the Iranian Foreign Ministry, and that is Mohammad Javad Zarif, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, their equivalent of our Secretary of State. There is a spokesman named Hossein Jaberi Ansari, but no such remarks can be found on his twitter account or in recent articles. Raman Ghavami, a reporter for the Jerusalem Post, appears to have attributed the statement to Ansari but failed to include a comma between the names of Ansari and Zarif, leading to the copied and pasted confusion...
.
Secretary of State Pompeo -vs- Chris Wallace
by sundance
{ theconservativetreehouse.com } ~ Secretary of State Mike Pompeo sits down for an interview with the Deep State toll booth operator Chris Wallace... Customary cost of admission, five shillings. Secretary Pompeo briefly discussed the ISIS terror attack in France yesterday and expands upon the upcoming summit with North Korean Chairman Kim Jong-un. Secretary Pompeo appears to have a more thorough understanding on the Trump Doctrine of using economics to achieve national security objectives than former Secretary Rex Tillerson. The duplicitous toll booth operator won’t raise the barricade until Pompeo discusses the view of former CIA Director John Brennan.   Pompeo exits the narrative and beats Wallace over the head with MAGA common sense: “Brennan’s remarks are silly“, moving on…
.
Expected Upsurge in Gaza Violence
by Richard Kemp
{ gatestoneinstitute.org } ~ I predict a riot — and much worse. The Palestinian terrorist group Hamas is orchestrating a 'demonstration' at the beginning of this week... of up to 200,000 people on the Gaza border with Israel, and is intent on turning it into an orgy of death and bloodshed. If that happens, the UN and EU, human rights groups and many Western media organizations will have helped bring it about. Hamas, which governs the Gaza Strip, is planning the bloody culmination of six weeks of violence along the border that has so far led to the deaths of around 50 of their own people and wounding of hundreds more. Now they intend to pile the bodies higher still, exploiting what they see as a perfect storm. It is the seventieth anniversary of the creation of the modern State of Israel — a date that Palestinians revile as 'Nakba' or 'Catastrophe' Day. It coincides with the opening of the US embassy in Jerusalem, a move abhorrent to those who consider the existence of the Jewish State illegitimate. And it is the beginning of the Islamic festival of Ramadan, a time when violence throughout the Muslim world often spirals. Hamas claim that the purpose of their 'demonstrations' is to break through the Israeli border en masse, march through the country and reclaim the homes that they say their people were thrown out of when Israel was formed — exercising the strongly disputed 'right of return'. But they know they cannot achieve that in the face of the formidable Israel Defence Force...   https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12297/gaza-violence
.
The never-ending war on terror 
by Katherine Zimmerman 
{ foreignaffairs.com } ~ Earlier this month, the United States announced that it was launching operations to liberate the final strongholds of the Islamic State (ISIS) in Syria... in what seemed to signal “mission accomplished” in the fight against global terrorism. Having finally wound down major combat operations in Iraq in late April, Washington was able to shift the focus of its offensive operations there to its fight against the terrorist group’s last strongholds in Syria and in its “geographic caliphate,” which includes parts of Afghanistan, Nigeria, and Yemen. As President Donald Trump recently said, “We’re going to be coming home relatively soon. We finished, at least, almost all our work with respect to ISIS in Syria, ISIS in Iraq, and we have done a job that nobody else has been able to do.” It may appear as if a global victory over the Islamic State is near, but it is not. What U.S. policymakers never seem to learn is that when it comes to global terrorism, the mission is not yet accomplished. The Islamic State or some successor could one day return to Iraq and Syria to restore its physical caliphate. While the United States was fighting the Islamic State, other groups clearly benefited. Take, for example, the strengthening since 2011 of al Qaeda and like-minded factions such as Ahrar al-Sham and Jaysh al-Islam, among others, in northwestern Syria. Al Qaeda is seeking to reinfiltrate the ranks of Iraqi Sunni insurgents from its base in Syria...   https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2018-05-11/never-ending-war...
.
Jimmy Carter says Trump should be bound to deals signed 
by other presidents without Senate approval
{ patriotnewsalerts.com } ~ Former President Jimmy Carter just crossed a line he never should have approached... Carter is claiming any legislation signed by a previous president should be left alone.  Carter should have read some history books before opening his mouth. He is more than a little upset Trump pulled out of liar-nObama’s legacy Iran nuclear deal. While Carter is making this out to be something unheard of, that is far from the case. Dating all the way back to John Adams, presidents have undone policy they did not either agree with or that was put in place due to a party line...   https://www.patriotnewsalerts.com/carter-says-trump-bound/?utm_sour... 
.
.
The Incredible Narcissism 
of liar-Hillary and Comey
by Daniel Greenfield
sultanknish.blogspot.com } ~ liar-Hillary Clinton is 5’4. Former FBI boss James Comey is 6’8. But they have one important thing in common. 

Both liar-Clinton and Comey put themselves first. 

liar-Hillary launched her spiteful book tour without any regard for what it would do to her party. No amount of frustration from her fellow Democrats would dissuade her from cashing in and lashing out at her enemies. And no amount of frustration from fellow FBI agents, including Comey’s own Bureau confidants, could dissuade him from cashing in and lashing out at Trump across a thousand talk shows. 

liar-Hillary Clinton’s book tour damaged Dem prospects. Comey’s book tour harms the investigation. Its entire existence violates FBI rules. Much as liar-Clinton’s book hurt her likely Dem successors. 

But both bitter book tours are the work of selfish, spiteful and egotistical people who don’t care how much damage they do to the allies who trusted them as long as they make money and settle scores. 

It’s only fitting that Comey is using the same excuse that liar-Hillary did for his leaks of classified information. “It wasn’t classified when I sent it.” It’s also inevitable that Comey, like liar-Clinton, takes refuge in the same sort of legalistic technicalities to justify his wrongdoing. Did he leak the documents? No, he gave them to someone else to pass on to the media. Is that leaking? No, because he was already a “private citizen.” 

Meanwhile Comey goes on claiming ignorance of the origins of the Fusion GPS dossier. 

"When did you learn that the DNC and liar-Hillary Clinton campaign had funded Christopher Steele’s work?" FOX News's Bret Baier asked Comey. 

Like liar-nObama, Comey claimed to have only found out about the dossier's true origins from the media. After being pressed by Baier, he finally declared, "I wanted to know what I knew." 

The technical term for that is, “Plausible deniability”. 

Or the most honorable and principled plausible deniability that $10 million can buy. 

Comey, like liar-Clinton, always sounds like he’s answering questions at a deposition, even when he’s at a media interview, and his replies are littered with lawyerese like, “Not to my recollection” and “my understanding”. 

Spot which ‘understanding’ answers in a television interview came from Comey and liar-Clinton. 

"Well, my understanding of what happened is that the State Department had e-mails that they gave to the committee that was formed." 

"Okay, my understanding was the activity was begun, that, that Steele was hired to look into was first funded by Republicans." 

Yes, they both speak the same way. 

“My understanding” means that I’m going to put forward something that is misleading while limiting my liability for doing so because I can claim that I ‘misunderstood’ its actual meaning. “Not to my recollection” means that I’m going to lie, but if you catch me, I’ll claim that I forgot about it. Oops. 

Or as Comey put it, when asked if he’d told Obama about the origins of the liar-Clinton-Steele dossier. 

“No, not to my recollection.” 

Comey’s recollections have been known to change over time. As have liar-Hillary Clinton’s. 

Mr. Comey, like Mrs. liar-Clinton, doesn’t know anything, whether he’s testifying in the Senate or to CNN. But when a public official answers, “Not to my recollection” and “my understanding” in TV interviews, he or she is reflexively answering questions in a way that avoids legal liability even when there isn’t any. 

Comey and liar-Clinton both suffer from the same brand of legalistic paranoia of career cover-uppers. It’s why Comey circulated the liar-Clinton draft among people like Strzok and got him to do the dirty work. It’s why Comey passed on a memo to his pal, who was also a lawyer, to be leaked to the media. Expect that fake attorney-client relationship’s confidentiality to be honored, unlike that of Trump and his actual lawyer. But much like that of liar-Hillary Clinton and her non-protected relationship with Cheryl Mills.

Every decision that Comey made was done to protect his own career. He allowed liar-nObama and liar-Hillary allies to run their version of Watergate against Trump as long as his own fingerprints weren’t on it. Comey wanted to benefit from an election rigging without ever being accountable for it. Letting McCabe get his hands dirty would allow him to claim that he didn’t know anything about what was going on. 

When McCabe’s antics threatened that state of affairs, Comey authored the Weiner letter. He didn’t believe the letter would stop liar-Hillary from winning, but it would protect him in case she lost. 

And it did. For a little while. 

But Comey couldn’t keep balancing the impossible demands of Democrats to bring down Trump, with Trump’s demands to be informed of what was going on. And so Comey tried to weasel out of it by leaking materials to the media and making it clear that there would be a price to pay for firing him.

Comey wasn’t loyal to a higher duty. His higher duty was always to his career. Just like liar-Hillary. 

“A Higher Loyalty” is a shameless effort by Comey to spin his self-serving actions as honorable. But a principled and honorable man would have wanted to know where the Steele dossier came from. 

"I wanted to know what I knew,” is the answer of a cynically dishonorable man. The sort of man who would kick off his comeback by posing with the Statue of Liberty after violating all that she stands for. 

Honor and loyalty to Comey are just more forms of plausible deniability. Duty and principle are another version of, “My understanding” and “Not to my recollection”. To paraphrase, Walter Sobchak, "Say what you want about the Democrats, but at least it's an ethos." McCabe, Strzok and the rest of the gang believed in something. James Comey only ever believed in covering the bureau of his behind. 

That’s why he collided with liar-Hillary Clinton. He couldn’t commit all the way to helping her, because they were two of a kind. liar-Hillary would sell out anyone. And so would Comey. Just ask McCabe. 

What happens when an unstoppable careerist hits an immovable bureaucrat? 

Comey wouldn’t put liar-Hillary ahead of his career. And liar-Hillary won’t put the Democrats ahead of her grievances. That’s why her people are taking potshots at Comey even though he’s helping the Dems. 

Neither Comey nor liar-Clinton have any higher loyalties. Their books are written in praise of themselves. 

Egomaniacs and narcissists have no sense of proportion. Their own happiness is the greater good that the world revolves around. It takes an egomaniac to produce “A Higher Loyalty” or “What Happened”. 

Both books are fueled by a grandiose conviction in the moral heroism of their authors. But that delusion is constantly being undermined by their self-serving lawyerly defenses of their actions. 

And by the final fact that neither Comey nor liar-Clinton can conceive of a good greater than themselves. 

Stripped of their pretensions, “What Happened” and “A Higher Loyalty” lay out a quest by two Washington D.C. insiders for their careers and everyone they blame for losing their jobs. Comey and liar-Clinton want us to believe that their Russian conspiracy theories somehow ennoble and justify them. 

They don’t. 

The Russian conspiracy theory has always been a self-serving effort by the liar-Clintons and their government allies to justify a ruthless campaign against their political opponents. Its tautological politics dress up the self-serving abuses of the conspiracy theory’s inventors and promoters as patriotism. They justify any assault and abuse to defend against a threat invented by liar-Clinton and promoted by Comey. 

When Comey replies that he didn’t want to know that the Steele dossier originated with the liar-Clinton campaign, it’s not the answer of an honorable man, but of a coward who didn’t want to know whose dirty work he was doing. An honorable man isn’t someone who can tweet someone else’s quotes about integrity, it’s a man who is accountable for his own deeds. 

Honor isn’t found in how harshly you treat your political opponents, but how sternly your view yourself. 

liar-Clinton and Comey take responsibility for nothing and assign responsibility for everything. Even when they talk about accepting responsibility, they mean they’re about to blame it on someone else. 

“A Higher Loyalty” and “What Happened” share a common thesis. It’s someone else’s fault. 

liar-Hillary blamed Comey. Now it’s Comey’s turn to shift the blame. 

Both of them deserve each other. America doesn’t deserve them. Or deserve what they’ve done to it.
 

Views: 15

Comment

You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center

Comment by Rudy Tirre on May 15, 2018 at 8:22am

Bonnie

Carter was a nothing president

Comment by Bonnie Somer on May 15, 2018 at 8:19am

WHY WAS CARTER ONE OF THE WORST PRES WELL HE JUST PROVED THAT ALONG W/ALL THE O/THINGS HE DID .  HORRORS YES READ HISTORY

LIGHTER SIDE

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Mike Lester

ALERT ALERT

Newt Says What The Rest Of Us Are Thinking:
It’s Time To Throw Peter Strzok In Jail

Disgraced FBI special agent Peter Strzok, a senior member of the bureau who gained notoriety in recent months over his anti-Trump text messages to a colleague, was grilled for nearly 10 hours during a joint congressional committee hearing on Thursday.

At issue was Strzok’s anti-Trump texts to former FBI lawyer and lover Lisa Page that coincided with his leading of the investigations into both former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email server scandal and the alleged Trump/Russia 2016 election collusion, as well as his involvement in the subsequent Robert Mueller special counsel probe.

The hearing proved to be a heated battle, as Strzok displayed an arrogant smugness in defiance of pointed questions from Republicans that he largely danced around, while Democrats sought to upend and undermine the entire hearing with a plethora of interruptions, parliamentary maneuvers and outright praise for the man who helped let Clinton off the hook while ferociously targeting Trump.

Former House speaker and presidential candidate Newt Gingrich was less than impressed with Strzok’s performance and cooperation in the hearing and suggested during an appearance on Fox Business that the FBI agent should be held in contempt of Congress.

“I think they have to move to hold him in contempt and throw him in jail,” Gingrich said of Congress and Strzok.

“This is a person who is willfully standing up and refusing to appear as a congressional witness and he was a government employee at the time,” he continued.

“He has every obligation to inform the legislative branch, and I don’t think they have any choice except to move a motion of contempt because he is fundamentally — and so is his girlfriend (Page) — they’re both fundamentally in violation of the entire constitutional process,” he added.

Page had been subpoenaed to appear before Congress on Wednesday but refused to appear, saying she’d been unable to review relevant documents prior to the scheduled hearing, a closed-door hearing that has since been rescheduled for Friday.

Gingrich was not the only one who thought Strzok deserved to be held in contempt of Congress, as House Judiciary Committee chairman Bob Goodlatte informed Strzok that he remained at risk of such during the hearing, according to The Daily Caller.

That warning from Goodlatte came after Strzok had refused to answer a straightforward question posed by House Oversight Committee chairman Trey Gowdy, regarding how many people Strzok had personally interviewed between a specific set of dates in relation to the Clinton email investigation.

“Mr. Strzok, please be advised that you can either comply with the committee’s direction to answer the question or refuse to do so,” Goodlatte stated. “The latter of which will place you in risk of a contempt citation and potential criminal liability. Do you understand that? The question is directed to the witness.”

Strzok still refused to answer, citing instructions received from his counsel and the FBI to not answer certain questions on certain topics.

Goodlatte replied, “Mr. Strzok, in a moment we will continue with the hearing, but based on your refusal to answer the question, at the conclusion of the day we will be recessing the hearing and you will be subject to recall to allow the committee to consider proceeding with a contempt citation.”

It is unclear if Goodlatte and the committee ultimately did consider a contempt citation for Strzok following the contentious hearing, nor is it clear if Page will be held in contempt for blowing off her subpoenaed appearance on Wednesday.

Hopefully Congress will follow through on the threats of contempt followed by actual jail time against Strzok and Page in response to their uncooperative behavior and failure to appear when subpoenaed, if only to ensure that future witnesses called before Congress for sensitive or contentious hearings don’t think they can get away with the same sort of behavior.

TEA PARTY TARGET

Cops Sent To Seize Veteran’s Guns Without A Warrant, He Refused To Turn Them Over

“No one from the state was going to take my firearms without due process,” says Leonard Cottrell, after successfully staving off law enforcement and the courts from confiscating his firearms. Cottrell, an Iraq War veteran, was at work when he received a phone call from his wife. The cops were there, busting in to take his guns away. It all started after a casual conversation his son had at school.

Ammoland reports:

Police said their visit was sparked by a conversation that Leonard Cottrell Jr.’s 13-year-old son had had with another student at the school. Cottrell said he was told his son and the other student were discussing security being lax and what they would have to do to escape a school shooting at Millstone Middle School.

The conversation was overheard by another student, who went home and told his parents, and his mother panicked. The mom then contacted the school, which contacted the State Police, according to Cottrell.

The visit from the troopers came around 10 p.m. on June 14, 2018, Cottrell said, a day after Gov. Phil Murphy signed several gun enforcement bills into law.

After several hours, Cottrell said police agreed not to take the guns but to allow him to move them to another location while the investigation continued.

“They had admitted several times that my son made no threat to himself or other students or the school or anything like that,” he said.

Cottrell said he made it very clear to the police that he was “not going to willingly give up my constitutional rights where there’s no justifiable cause, no warrants, no nothing.”

The troopers searched his son’s room and found nothing, Cottrell said.

“To appease everybody, I had my firearms stored someplace else,” he said. “That way, during the course of the investigation, my son doesn’t have access to them and it’s on neutral ground and everything and everybody’s happy.”

“In the Garden State, the usual approach is to confiscate first and ask questions later, and victims of this approach often don’t know their rights. ‎In this case, the victim pushed back and confiscation was avoided — but the circumstances surrounding the incident are outrageous. A student expressing concern over lack of security is not a reason to send police to the student’s home — but it might be a reason to send police to the school to keep students and teachers safe” said Scott L. Bach, executive director of the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs and a member of the NRA board of directors.

NJ.com adds:

Cottrell, a disabled U.S. Army veteran who served three tours during “Operation Iraqi Freedom,” owns a shotgun and a pistol. He has all the correct permits to own the firearms, he said, and predominately uses the shotgun to hunt.

He said his wife allowed the officers to enter the home, and with her permission, they searched his son’s room — but they did not find any weapons, he said. The officers, he said, didn’t have a warrant but still wanted to take his guns. Cottrell wouldn’t let them.

“No one from the state was going to take my firearms without due process,” he said Thursday.

He said the attempted seizure resulted because of a new law Gov. Phil Murphy signed into law that makes it easier for police to confiscate guns when someone in the state poses a threat to themselves or others. The law is part of a broader statewide effort to make New Jersey’s gun laws even tougher amid the national outcry for more gun control in the wake of the school shooting in Parkland, Florida.

Cottrell said the officers “danced around the issue” when he confronted them about the new law.

A New Jersey State Police spokesman declined to answer questions about whether this incident had anything to do with the new gun laws.

In an email, Sgt. First Class Jeff Flynn said, “Troopers responded to Mr. Cottrell’s residence in reference to the report of a possible school threat. Based on their investigation, it was determined that Mr. Cottrell’s weapons did not need to be seized.”

David Codrea, writing for Ammoland, further added:

To appease everybody, I had my firearms stored someplace else,” New Jersey gun owner and Army veteran Leonard Cottrell Jr. told New Jersey 101.5 after a June 14 visit from State Police,. “That way, during the course of the investigation, my son doesn’t have access to them and it’s on neutral ground and everything and everybody’s happy.”

Cottrell was recalling state troopers showing up at his door to confiscate firearms after his 13-year-old son was overheard discussing lax school safety with a friend.

Indoctrinated by a pervasive snitch culture — one that never seems to deter the blatantly obvious demonic nutjobs — the eavesdropping student told his parents, who told school administrators, who in turn called the cops. (Note “If you see something, say something” carries risks of its own – if you report the wrong person, you could end up smeared as a “hater.”)

“Cottrell said he made it very clear to the police that he was ‘not going to willingly give up my constitutional rights where there’s no justifiable cause, no warrants, no nothing,’” the report continued. Despite that, his home is now a “gun free zone” and that has been publicized by the media. He has, in fact, willingly ceded those rights, and by his own words in order to make authorities “happy.”

Before judging him for that, consider the environment that is New Jersey. Then consider the overwhelming force the state can bring to bear, and its predisposition to using it, especially if it’s to enforce citizen disarmament. It’s easy to anonymously declare “Molon Labe” on the internet. In meatspace, resistance is more effective when the aggressor doesn’t get to dictate the time and place, especially if that place is your home and you have family inside.

Appeasing gun-grabbers, generally couched as “compromise,” is impossible. It’s like throwing a scrap of flesh to a circling pack of jackals and expecting them to be sated and leave you alone — instead of sensing opportunity and fear, and moving in closer.

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service