TheFrontPageCover
~ Featuring ~
Should Trump Voluntarily Talk to Mueller? 
by Judge Andrew P. Napolitano
.
Judge threatens to hold AG Sessions
in contempt over asylum deportation
by Stephen Dinan 
{ washingtontimes.com } ~ A furious federal judge threatened Thursday to hold Attorney General Jeff Sessions in contempt of court... in a touchy case over asylum seekers’ rights after learning that some plaintiffs might have been deported in defiance of his wishes. Judge Emmet G. Sullivan said the government appeared to have “spirited away” a woman and her child who’d fled a violent husband in El Salvador and were seeking asylum in the U.S., but who were struggling against a new tougher asylum policy Mr. Sessions created in June. The mother, known in court files by the pseudonym “Carmen,” was taken from her detention facility and likely put on a plane Thursday morning, the American Civil Liberties Union said — even though the Justice Department had promised the court none of the plaintiffs would be deported before the judge could rule. “Turn that plane around,” the judge ordered the government, while repeatedly saying he was “extremely upset” with the development. He threatened to start issuing show-cause orders and then hold people in contempt of court if the situation wasn’t immediately remedied...   https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/aug/9/sessions-threatened...
.
Carla Provost Officially Becomes Chief of U.S. Border Patrol – 
First Female Head of U.S.B.P.
by Pete Williams
{ nbcnews.com } ~ Carla Provost, a 23-year veteran of the U.S. Border Patrol, was officially appointed the agency's first female chief Thursday... more than a year after she was named acting chief. Customs and Border Protection commissioner Kevin McAleenan called it a historic announcement. "No one is better suited or better prepared to be chief,” he said. “Carla is an agent’s agent.” In becoming the Border Patrol’s 18th chief, Provost said, “I don’t know if it’s possible to be both humble and proud, but that’s the emotion I’m feeling today.” As for the challenges the agency faces, she said, "Border security is more than just what we do on the border every day." Supporting the men and women in the force requires closing "some of these loopholes that are drawing people to bring their families and their children in a very treacherous trip to come into this country."...
.
Former Ohio State Wrestler Recants Claim Against Jim Jordan
by sundance
{ theconservativetreehouse.com } ~ Everyone with a reasonable amount of common sense knows the claims that Representative Jim Jordan knew of sexual abuse at Ohio State twenty-years-ago was a manufactured political hit-job... Now one of the accusers recants. A former Ohio State University wrestler is recanting his claims that Ohio Republican Rep. Jim Jordan knew of sexual abuse allegations against a university physician when he coached wrestling at the school over 20 years ago. “At no time did I ever say or have any direct knowledge that Jim Jordan knew of Dr. Richard Strauss’s inappropriate behavior,” Mark Coleman, a former MMA fighter who wrestled at Ohio State when Jordan coached there, said in a statement. “I have nothing but respect for Jim Jordan as I have known him for more than 30 years and know him to be of impeccable character.”...
.
Special master finishes review of materials 
seized from Michael Cohen in FBI raids: Report
by Naomi Lim
{ washingtonexaminer.com The court-appointed special master tasked with reviewing materials seized during FBI raids targeting Michael Cohen has reportedly completed her assessment... a major development as federal prosecutors in New York investigate whether President Trump's former personal lawyer committed tax fraud. Barbara Jones has deemed 2,558 items to not be privileged nor highly personal given the lawyer-client relationship that once existed betwee} ~ n Cohen and the president, per an MSNBC report Thursday.  The materials may now be used by federal prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York as they probe Cohen for possible tax fraud violations related to his taxi medallion business. More than 3.7 million items were seized in April. The prosecutors are assessing whether Cohen under reported his income from the business in federal tax returns, the Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday. Authorities are also investigating if Cohen was allowed to apply for loans through Sterling National Bank without providing necessary documentation, the report said...   https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/special-master-finishes-rev... 
.
Truth Behind Alex Jones Banishment Surfaces, 
All Rooted in Jealousy from Millennial
by LISA PAYNE-NAEGER
{ westernjournal.com } ~ There’s a hint of snark and undeniable glee in the reporting on some liberal media sites at the most recent assault on a high-profile voice... in the media that liberals love to hate. Alex Jones is the latest commentator to fall from the good graces of social media’s Apple, YouTube, Facebook and Spotify and liberals couldn’t be happier. The independent talk radio host and conspiracy theorist of Infowars fame is the target of a massive ban prompted by what is considered “hate speech” by the powers that be at those distribution platforms. While Jones has certainly said some unconventional, unpopular, and ultimately untrue things throughout his 22-year career, it may seem this latest action against him was more or less a premeditated attack from a surprising source — with a possibly surprising motivation. Enter, Jared Holt. He’s apparently the latest left-wing millennial attempting to make a name for himself by throwing media bombs at the biggest targets available outside the left-wing bubble. He advertises himself on his personal blog as a writer, an award-winning photographer and a video and imaging specialist. He’s a 2015 graduate of the University of Central Arkansas, and has a way of getting around in liberal circles. He’s written for People For the American Way, Right Wing Watch and Media Matters. The guy is a go-getter who isn’t short on opinion...
.

. 

Should Trump Voluntarily Talk to Mueller? 
by Judge Andrew P. Napolitano

{ jewishworldreview.com } ~ When federal prosecutors are nearing the end of criminal investigations, they often invite the subjects of those investigations to speak with them. The soon-to-be defendants are tempted to give their version of events to prosecutors, and prosecutors are looking to take the legal pulse of the subjects of their work. These invitations should always be declined, but they are not.

Special counsel Robert Mueller — who is investigating President Donald Trump for obstruction of justice, pre-presidential banking irregularities and conspiracy to solicit or receive campaign aid from foreign nationals the latter is what the media erroneously call collusion — has made it known to former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, the head of Trump's legal team, that he wants to speak to the president.

Should Trump voluntarily speak with Mueller? In a word: No. Here is the back story.

Though I have been critical of some judgment calls made by Giuliani in his representation of Trump, I recognize, like anyone who has watched him or worked with or against him, that Giuliani is a smart and experienced lawyer. He has prosecuted directly or indirectly more than 5,000 criminal cases. He knows the criminal justice system, and he understands the power of prosecutors.

Yet the advice of most criminal defense lawyers and legal commentators familiar with the situation in which Giuliani finds himself today is to keep his client far away from the prosecutors. Here's why.

Thanks to Giuliani's numerous television appearances during which he has forcefully defended his client, Giuliani and Mueller have engaged in a very public series of negotiations on the limits, if any, that they might agree to as ground rules for an interview of the president.

Giuliani wants to limit the subject of questions to the alleged conspiracy between Trump's campaign and Russians. After all, he argues, this is the stated purpose given by the Department of Justice for starting the special counsel's investigation. And he wants to limit the number of questions and the time for all questions and answers. He argues that the president's constitutional obligations transcend the needs of Mueller's probe.

Mueller argues that he has an ethical obligation to follow whatever evidence of criminal behavior lawfully comes into his hands, about the president or his colleagues. As such, because he does not know in advance what Trump's answers to his questions will be, he cannot consent to any limitations on his follow-up questions.

If I were Giuliani, I would tell Mueller that the negotiations are terminated and the president will not voluntarily sit for an interview with him. There are paramount and prudential reasons for this.

First, when prosecutors want to talk to a person they are investigating, the talk is intended to help the prosecutors, not the subject of the investigation. So why should Trump engage in a process that could only help those pursuing him?

Second, the prosecutors know their evidence far better than the president or his legal team possibly could know it, and these prosecutors know how to trip up whomever they are interviewing. So why should Trump give prosecutors an opportunity to trap him into uttering a falsehood in an environment where doing so can be a criminal act?

I recognize that Giuliani's client is the most powerful person on earth, someone who is accustomed to having his way followed. And he has said countless times that he wants to talk to Mueller. Yet President Trump does not use an economy of words. Experience teaches that the undisciplined use of words by the subject of a criminal investigation is a prosecutor's dream when it takes place in an official inquiry.

It is Giuliani's job to prevent that dream from becoming reality by convincing his client, perhaps through an aggressive mock question-and-answer session conducted by Giuliani himself, that no good for Trump could come from a Mueller interview. I have seen many criminal cases in which potential defendants who thought they could talk prosecutors out of an indictment tried to do so and made matters worse for themselves.

But there is an elephant in the room.

That elephant is a grand jury subpoena. The Mueller interview is voluntary. If Trump agreed to it, he would not be under oath, and he could consult with counsel during it. Also, he could leave it whenever he wished. A grand jury subpoena compels a person to testify. The testimony is under oath, takes place without counsel present and can go on for as long as prosecutors and the grand jurors want to question the person. And they can ask him any questions they want to ask.

Surely, Trump would challenge a subpoena before a federal district court, and the challenge might land in the Supreme Court. Yet the controlling case, United States v. Nixon, is a unanimous 1974 Supreme Court decision requiring President Richard Nixon to surrender his infamous Oval Office tapes.

Though not directly on the point of compelled presidential personal oral testimony, the language in the Nixon case and the values underlying it all favor enforcement of a subpoena requiring personal testimony by the president. When the Ken Starr grand jury served a subpoena for the president's testimony on liar-Bill Clinton, whose crimes it was investigating, liar-Clinton and his lawyers concluded that he needed to comply with it, which he did.

Of course, Trump could accept the subpoena and then invoke his Fifth Amendment-protected right to silence. However, he once publicly said, "If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth?" So such an invocation would be catastrophic politically, but it would legally insulate him from helping Mueller to prosecute him.

Another president once weighed in on dealings with bureaucrats and prosecutors. Ronald Reagan quipped many times that the nine most terrifying words in the English language are: "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help." Mr. President, beware of prosecutors bearing invitations.

Views: 10

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 August 10, 2018 at 1:12pm

these federal judges are liberal-dummycrats-dems, it shows us that they don't understand the constitution and what to determine how its meaning is. they have no business in being a federal judge.

Comment by Bonnie Somer on August 10, 2018 at 1:04pm

THESE JUDGES HAVE SOME DAMN NERVE MAKING A PLANE COME BACK B/C SOMEONE CAME HERE ILLEGALLY AND WANTS ASYLUM   GEE WHY DON'T WE TAKE IN ANYONE  WHY B/C WE DON'T HAVE TO NOR GIVE ASYLUM TO ANYONE.   AND DEPORT WE CAN. 

THESE FED JUDGES THINK THEY ARE SCOTUS THEY ARE NOT

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by Tom Stiglich

Political Cartoons by Pat Cross

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

ALERT ALERT

TEA PARTY -> Lois Lerner Case Explodes:
IRS Docs Link McCain’s Office To Tea Party Attacks

Since announcing his brain cancer was terminal, Arizon Sen. John McCain has continued to make headlines, but not due to his medical status. Instead, it has been one controversy after another revolving around him, and now one more had been added to the list.

This one is based in his dislike not for Ted Cruz or Rand Paul, but of the tea party.

McCain has never really endeared himself to conservatives, and he made his feeling public about the tea party movement at a breakfast hosted by the Christian Science Monitor in 2015, according to a Yahoo report.

“I think also — I probably shouldn’t say this — but some of (the tea party) appeals to the bad angels of our nature rather than the better angels of our nature,” McCain said.

This attitude ties into the latest scandal swirling around McCain.

One of a number of scandals that plagued President Barack Obama and his administration involved the IRS targeting tea party groups after 2010. It seemed that their tax-exempt status requests were denied or delayed due to intense political partisanship in the agency.

In May 2013, The Washington Post reported that the IRS’s exempt-organizations division director Lois Lerner “let slip” the week prior “that low-level IRS staffers had focused extra scrutiny on conservative groups with words such as ‘tea party’ or ‘patriot’ in their names.”

In addition, “internal reviews have shown that Lerner knew about the targeting in 2011 — but neither Congress nor the public knew until (2013).” Despite this, Lerner was never prosecuted and was allowed to retire with her taxpayer-funded pension intact.

This did not change, even after House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady, a Texas Republican, and Tax Policy Subcommittee Chairman Peter Roskam, an Illinois Republican, wrote a letter to Attorney General Jeff Sessions. In it, they begged him to reopen a probe into the matter, according to Jay Sekulow, chief council for the American Center for Law and Justice, writing in a commentary for Fox News.

When President Donald Trump was sworn into office, some held out hope that the perceived injustices from Obama’s tenure would somehow be made right. However, in September 2017, Trump’s administration had already preemptively declined to pursue criminal charges against Lerner “based on the available evidence,” according to Fox News.

But more has since been uncovered about the scandal. Government watchdog group Judicial Watch has obtained and released “internal IRS documents, including material revealing that Sen. John McCain’s former staff director and chief counsel on the Senate Homeland Security Permanent Subcommittee, Henry Kerner, urged top IRS officials, including then-director of exempt organizations Lois Lerner, to “audit so many that it becomes financially ruinous.”

Judicial Watch �dd0e

JW President @TomFitton: Much of what you know about the IRS scandal is thanks to JW... Our new docs show the scandal is bipartisan in nature. A McCain staffer suggested Lois Lerner audit all of the 501(c)(4) groups in a way that'd be financially ruinous.

Meeting notes from April 30, 2013, involving Kerner, Lerner, “and other high-ranking IRS officials” were obtained by JW. With the meeting taking place only 10 days before the IRS scandal exploded into the public view, they are particularly incriminating against Kerner and Lerner:

“Henry Kerner asked how to get to the abuse of organizations claiming section 501 (c)(4) but designed to be primarily political. Lois Lerner said the system works, but not in real time.”

“Henry Kerner noted that these organizations don’t disclose donors. Lois Lerner said that if they don’t meet the requirements, we can come in and revoke, but it doesn’t happen timely.”

“Nan Marks said if the concern is that organizations engaging in this activity don’t disclose donors, then the system doesn’t work. Henry Kerner said that maybe the solution is to audit so many that it is financially ruinous. Nikole noted that we have budget constraints.”

“Elise Bean suggested using the list of organizations that made independent expenditures. Lois Lerner said that it is her job to oversee it all, not just political campaign activity.”

Thus far, there is no evidence that McCain knew about or directed Kerner to take such action. It is plausible that Kerner, knowing of McCain’s dislike of the tea party, opted to be a proactive and loyal staffer by urging the IRS to take action against the groups.

But McCain’s personality does little to keep him far removed from the scandal and tongues are wagging with speculation as to his involvement. Regardless, McCain’s frosty relationship with President Donald Trump has not made the Arizona senator many fans among Trump supporters.

New suspicions about him betraying the tea party won’t help matters at all.

OMG

Chelsea Handler Says Fox Doesn’t Work With
Black People, Obviously Doesn’t Watch Network

Humor is supposed to be based on truth. After all, the reason we laugh at a joke or scenario is because it triggers a feeling of recognition about reality, especially if it’s presented in an unexpected way.

It doesn’t look like “comedian” Chelsea Handler has a very firm grasp on truth or reality, however.

After a production error during a Fox News broadcast was called out by users on Twitter, the raunchy and sex-obsessed Handler tried to bash the network … but ended up showing off her ignorance instead.

“Fox News honored Aretha Franklin by using a graphic that contained a photo of Patti LaBelle,” the comedian and television host posted on Twitter Thursday evening.

That part was true enough: Fox admitted that they made a mistake on a background slide during a tribute to the late soul singer, and accidentally showed a faded photo of LaBelle. The main image still showed Franklin, who passed away on Thursday in Detroit.

Broadcast television is complex, which you would think Handler understands after being involved in TV for many years. Honest mistakes happen on every network. But no: In Handler’s alternate reality, the only explanation for the mistake was racism.

“It’s probably hard for anyone who works at Fox News to tell black people apart because they’ve never worked with any,” she declared.

Chelsea Handler  @chelseahandler

Fox News honored Aretha Franklin by using a graphic that contained a photo of Patti LaBelle. It’s probably hard for anyone who works at Fox News to tell black people apart because they’ve never worked with any.

Was she trying to be bitter or funny? It was hard to tell, but either way, that statement shows just how isolated the Hollywood left is from reality.

If she really believes that Fox has “never worked with any” black people, maybe she should try an experiment: Actually watch the channel for a minute.

She would probably tune in to the face of Harris Faulkner, the enthusiastic and Emmy-winning host of “Outnumbered,” which airs every single weekday.

Or, maybe she could get a clue from Deneen Borelli, another well-known face of Fox News for nearly a decade. How about the venerable Juan Williams, co-host of “The Five” and a “Fox News Sunday” regular for over 20 years?

Nah. They apparently don’t count, because Handler would rather live in an alternate reality of ignorance than admit she was the one making racial assumptions.

We’re not finished! Moving on to frequent guest contributors to Fox News, how about Candace Owens? Brandon Tatum? Ben Carson? Larry Elder? All of these smart individuals are familiar faces at Fox, and all are — look closely! — African American.

That’s saying nothing of the behind-the-scenes staff at Fox, a good number of whom are of course black. In fact, it’s completely possible the photo mix-up was accidentally made by a black employee. Handler openly assumed the race of the staff members who made the error, while knowing nothing.

Once again, the left has tipped their hand and revealed just how elitist and out of touch they are.

Handler has likely never turned on Fox News in her life, yet she thinks she’s an expert on it. She eagerly diminishes and waves away the contributions of black Americans to one of the most popular news stations in the nation, while lecturing others about race.

This type of attitude implies that only “liberal approved” black voices count. If they don’t parrot a 43-year-old white comedian’s politics, they’re invisible to her.

That arrogant view, and not an honest editing mistake, is perhaps the real outrage here … and it’s exactly why so many black voters are walking away from the left.

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service