TheFrontPageCover
~ Featuring ~  
Questions for Chase (Away) Bank
Michelle Malkin
  

.
dirty cop-Mueller’s Despicable Parthian Shot 
by David Catron
{spectator.org} ~ When special counsel dirty cop-Robert Mueller finally finished his investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election, he produced a report that confirms much of the criticism President Trump has leveled at him during the past two years... It clearly reveals that dirty cop-Mueller’s partisan investigators were determined to “get Trump,” and that they were frustrated by their inability to do so. This is most obvious in the section dealing with obstruction of justice. As it is phrased in the Introduction to Volume II, “This report does not conclude that the President committed a crime.” An honest evaluation would have stopped there. dirty cop-Mueller’s team, however, were loath to pursue the honorable course. Their partisan bias compelled them to gratuitously add — after taking eight full paragraphs to explain why they didn’t conclude that Trump had obstructed justice — that they nonetheless would “not exonerate him.” This is the cheapest of cheap shots. It is obviously a cowardly attempt to damage the President with innuendo rather than an actual accusation of obstruction that would eventually have to be supported with proof of “conscious wrongdoing” that dirty cop-Mueller couldn’t produce. dirty cop-Mueller and his minions opted, instead, for good old-fashioned calumny. This is particularly disgraceful considering the restraint Trump demonstrated during the probe. He could, for example, have asserted executive privilege to prevent investigators from gaining access to all manner of documents as well as several witnesses. Trump is the first president since Jimmy Carter not to invoke that well-established prerogative. Trump also resisted the temptation to simply halt the probe, a power that he does possess under Article II of the Constitution. dirty cop-Mueller ignored this cooperation and chronicled 10 examples of unobstruction in the Executive Summary of Volume II. Below is a summary of eachThe Campaign’s response to reports about Russian support for Trump: When “questions arose” about Russia’s support for Trump, and WikiLeaks released damning DNC emails, “Trump publicly expressed skepticism that Russia was responsible.” Trump denied having Russian business partners, “even though as late as June 2016 the Trump Organization had been pursuing a licensing deal for a skyscraper to be built in Russia.” But would Trump engage in obstruction if he wasn’t guilty of collusion? Conduct involving FBI Director Comey and Michael Flynn: The President’s reaction to the continuing Russia investigation: The President’s termination of scumbag-Comey: The appointment of a Special Counsel and efforts to remove him: Efforts to curtail the Special Counsel’s investigation:  Efforts to prevent public disclosure of evidence: Further efforts to have the Attorney General take control of the investigation: Efforts to have McGahn deny that he had ordered him to have the Special Counsel removed: Conduct towards Flynn, Manafort...   https://spectator.org/muellers-despicable-parthian-shot/?utm_source...  
.
Spain: Does the Term 'Islamist' 
Constitute Hate Speech?
by Soeren Kern
gatestoneinstitute.org } ~ Spanish prosecutors have opened a criminal investigation to determine whether the secretary general of Vox, a fast-rising Spanish populist party... is guilty of hate speech for warning of an "Islamist invasion." The criminal inquiry, based on a complaint from a Muslim activist group, appears aimed at silencing critical discussion of Islam ahead of national elections on April 28. More broadly, however, the case poses a potentially immeasurable threat to the exercise of free speech in Spain. Prosecutors in Valencia, the third-largest city in Spain, said that they were investigating Javier Ortega Smith, the second-ranking leader of Vox, for an alleged hate crime after they received a complaint from a Muslim group called "Muslims Against Islamophobia" (Musulmanes Contra la Islamofobia). At a rally in Valencia on September 16, 2018, Ortega Smith declared that Europe's "common enemy" is the "Islamist invasion": "Spain is facing threats from internal and external enemies. The internal enemies are perfectly identifiable: the Catalan separatists, the friends of Basque terrorists, those who want to tear our nation apart...."The external enemies want to tell us how to run our country.... Angela Merkel and her fellow travelers, scumbag-George Soros, the immigration mafias, believe that they can tell us who can and cannot enter our country. They demand that our boats pluck so-called castaways out of the sea, transfer them to our ports and shower them with money. Who do they think we are? We say enough is enough.... Spain and us should stand with Ortega Smith. 
.
scumbag-Adam Schiff Formally Invites dirty
cop-Mueller to Testify, Says Public
‘Deservesthe Facts’
by hannity.com:  House Intel Chairman scumbag-Adam Schiff formally invited dirty cop-Robert Mueller to testify before his committee Thursday... saying the American people “deserve the facts” after the special counsel’s two-year investigation into Russia collusion. “The House Intelligence Committee has formally invited Special Counsel dirty cop-Mueller to testify on the counterintelligence investigation,” posted scumbag-Schiff on social media. “After a two year investigation, the public deserves the facts, not Attorney General Barr’s political spin.”The letter states the Democrat chairman hopes to speak with dirty cop-Mueller “at the earliest opportunity” and hopes to secure a “mutually agreeable date in May.” This prove scumbag-Schiff has the facts even if it hits in the face. dirty cop-Mueller will prove that.
.
Russia’s Gas Web Ensnares Europe
by Varsha Koduvayur and Greg Everett  
{fdd.org} ~ As Washington readies itself for a diminished role in the Middle East, Moscow is laying the groundwork for a significant long-term presence... By acquiring pipelines and exploration rights in Turkey, Iraq, Lebanon, and Syria, Russia is building a land bridge to Europe through the Middle East. In doing so, it will cement its role as Europe’s primary gas supplier and expand its influence in the Middle East, posing serious risks to U.S. and European interests. Russia already supplies 35 percent of Europe’s total gas imports, and it has long worked to head off any European efforts to diversify energy supplies. Here, Russia also has to worry about its abysmal relations with Ukraine—the conduit for most of its Europe-bound exports. Building an energy transit network through the Middle East would allow Moscow to stay in the game. In this new network, Turkey is one of the most important transit points. The Russian state-owned gas company Gazprom already operates the Blue Stream pipeline, which handles approximately 16 percent of Moscow’s gas exports to Europe, via Turkey and Bulgaria. Now, a second pipeline, TurkStream, is expected to come online before the end of this year. It will transport approximately 14 percent of Moscow’s gas exports to Europe, via Turkey and Greece. These two pipelines come on top of Nord Stream 2, and together, all three will make Europe even more dependent on Russian gas while also driving deeper the wedge between the United States and the European Union over Russia’s use of energy infrastructure as a political weapon. Together, the three pipelines will be more than enough to replace exports that make their way to Europe through Ukraine. Another leg of the new network will run through Iraq’s semi-autonomous Kurdish region before connecting to Turkey’s pipeline network for further export to Europe. In September 2017—days before the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) held an ill-fated referendum on independence—the Russian state-owned energy company Rosneft inked an agreement with the KRG to fund a $1 billion gas pipeline from Kurdistan to Turkey. The pipeline is expected to be able to meet approximately 6 percent of Europe’s yearly gas demand. And then, in October 2017, Rosneft took a controlling interest in an existing KRG oil pipeline to Turkey for $1.8 billion. That pipeline has been at the heart of strained relations between Iraq’s central government and the KRG since 2013, when Erbil began unilaterally exporting oil to Turkey through the pipeline, a move Baghdad criticized as a major constitutional violation...
.
Buzzfeed Finally Admits It Was Wrong 
About Trump Directing Michael Cohen To Lie
by Ashe Schow
dailywire.com } ~ Remember how the media yes, including The Daily Wire jumped on a January 17, 2019 report in Buzzfeed that the Special Counsel had evidence... that President Donald Trump “directed” his former attorney Michael Cohen to lie to prosecutors?  The story was questionable on the surface, as its sources were anonymous law enforcement officials and by the time it was reported, Cohen had already been charged with crimes and this would have been something included in those charges. Further, it was clear even the left-wing media was unsure of the veracity of the report, as they couched their reporting on it with the qualifier “if true.” Hours after the report was released — and after left-wing media outlets spent the day pushing the narrative to suggest Trump was going down soon — Special Counsel dirty cop-Robert Mueller’s office issued a rare statement calling the report “not accurate.” The Washington Post and The New York Times followed up that statement with reports from anonymous sources corroborating the claim of inaccuracy. "BuzzFeed's description of specific statements to the Special Counsel's Office, and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael Cohen's Congressional testimony are not accurate,” said Peter Carr, a spokesman for dirt cop-Mueller. Yet Buzzfeed held steadfast to the story, with Editor-in-Chief Ben Smith going on national TV to defend his reporters and his outlet. Now that dirty cop-Mueller’s report has been released, Smith has finally acknowledged that Buzzfeed’s reporting was wrong, and offered a detailed explanation of how it happened... There will be more outlets claiming they were wrong.
.
.
.
Questions for Chase (Away) Bank

Michelle Malkin

 

I have been a Chase Bank customer for years. Who knows how much longer it’ll be? Will the company’s thought police come for me next? How about you? If you are a non-leftist who does business with the financial giant owned by J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., you need to ask questions and get answers.

On Tuesday, investigative journalist James O'Keefe and his Project Veritas team released a disturbing new video on the runaround that Chase officials gave Texas conservative entrepreneur Enrique Tarrio about his canceled account. Big business may very well be enabling America’s very own version of the Chinese social credit system in which political dissent is flagged, shunned, punished and eradicated.

First, some background:

Tarrio is a young, peaceful, Afro-Cuban freethinker and chairman of the Proud Boys organization. In February 2019, the Texas Trump supporter received a letter from Chase Bank informing him that “after careful consideration,” the financial institution could “no longer support” his banking account. The notice followed a hit piece against minorities who support the president by The Daily Beast, a reliable echo chamber for the discredited Southern Poverty Law Center smear machine.

Tarrio was subsequently kicked off Chase’s payment processor, which he used to sell patriotic and pro-Trump T-shirts. Next, he was deplatformed from Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Airbnb, FirstData, Square, Stripe and PayPal before losing his bank accounts. When I asked on Twitter in February why we can’t have just one financial institution that doesn’t cave to social justice warriors, the official Chase Twitter account tweeted me back:

“Hi Michelle, this article is inaccurate. We did not close his personal account. We do not close accounts based on political affiliation.”

I pointed out that Chase’s letter clearly stated that the company had closed his account. “So if not for political reasons,” I asked, “why, ‘after careful consideration,’ did you close his account?” The social media manager of Chase’s corporate Twitter account, previously so eager to spill the tea, replied: “For privacy reasons, we can’t say more.”

Thanks to Project Veritas, we now know more. Undercover audio and video exposed how:

–One Chase employee blamed “clerical” issues on Tarrio’s account cancellation.

–Another stated: “I see nothing that indicates any reason why the account should be closed. I don’t see any outstanding transactions or anything ridiculous.”

–Another explained: “Chase is not involved with any like, you know, alt-right people or anything.” Those with “no moral character” are people that “the bank usually doesn’t get involved with in any "business relationships, period.”

–Several repeated a company line in Tarrio’s mysterious file: “Decision is not reversible.”

Others who received Chase shutdown notices so far in 2019: conservative Rebel Media contributor Martina Markota, anti-sharia and pro-borders investigative journalist Laura Loomer and U.S. Army combat vet and vocal Trump supporter Joe Biggs. Were Markota’s, Loomer’s and Biggs’ removals “clerical” errors or unfounded or were they based on an ideological litmus test disguised as a “moral character” assessment?

More questions arise:

How exactly is J.P. Morgan Chase’s $500,000 donation last year to the SPLC left-wing operatives being put to use?

Why did the company embrace a known defamation racket whose stated mission is to “destroy” its political enemies on the right?

What comment does Chase have now that SPLC’s top leaders have been purged amid internal accusations of intolerance and discrimination within the walls of the notorious Poverty Palace?

Does Chase keep tabs on high-profile conservative customers’ political speech on social media platforms?

Is Chase operating from the same playbook as Paypal, which is booting off conservatives in consultation with the SPLC? One of its most recent victims: Luke Rohlfing, a young reporter for BigLeaguePolitics.com, who had exposed how the payment processor was allowing Open Borders Inc. heavyweight Pueblo Sin Fronteras to raise money for illegal immigrant caravans conspiring to break our immigration laws — even though Paypal’s own terms of service state clearly that users may not engage in any activities that “violate any law, statute, ordinance or regulation.”

Tarrio warns of the speech-squelching pattern emerging across Silicon Valley and on Wall Street: “First we get silenced on social media, then Paypal, then I get debanked. It’s a very dangerous trend.”

He is not alone. Former Toronto mayoral candidate and social media commentator Faith Goldy told me: “To date I’ve been banned from: PayPal, Patreon, GoFundMe, Airbnb, Facebook and Instagram. I’ve committed no crime! My only fault is loving my country and quoting government statistics to a camera from my kitchen table. The nature of big tech censorship is imperialistic and these Silicon Valley nerds won’t stop until every freethinker is snuffed or scared into submission.”

As for Chase Bank, I sent all my questions to chief communications officer Patricia Wexler, who challenged the authenticity of one of the employees recorded by Veritas (O'Keefe showed proof of the Chase New York media relations number dialed and had audio of the employee identifying himself as a Chase rep) and ignored the substance of the report.

Evasion and denial are surefire ways to lose business. Is it Chase Bank or Chase Away Bank? Inquiring customers would like to know.  

~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/opinion/62439?mailing_id=4210&utm_medium...  

Views: 16

Comment

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

Join Tea Party Command Center

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

ALERT ALERT

Horrible: Democrats Set The Constitution On Fire With Fraudulent Impeachment

House Democrats unveiled two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump on Tuesday morning after an investigation that violated fundamental provisions of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The investigation of the president began with the complaint of a so-called “whistleblower” who turned out to be a rogue Central Intelligence Agency employee, protected by a lawyer who had called for a “coup” against Trump in early 2017.

Democrats first demanded that the “whistleblower” be allowed to testify. But after House Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) was found to have lied about his committee’s contact with the “whistleblower,” and after details of the “whistleblower’s” bias began to leak, Democrats reversed course. In violation of the President Trump’s Sixth Amendment right to confront his accuser, Democrats refused to allow the “whistleblower” to testify. They argue the president’s procedural rights, even if they existed, would not apply until he was tried in the Senate — but they also invented a fraudulent “right to anonymity” that, they hope, might conceal the whistleblower even then.

Schiff began the “impeachment inquiry” in secret, behind the closed doors of the Sensitive Compartmentalized Information Facility (SCIF) in the basement of the U.S. Capitol, even though none of the testimony was deemed classified. Few members of Congress were allowed access. Schiff allowed selective bits of testimony to leak to friendly media, while withholding transcripts of testimony.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), having allowed the secret process to unfold, legitimized it with a party-line vote authorizing the inquiry. The House resolution denied President Trump the procedural rights enjoyed by Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, and denied the minority party the traditional right to object to witnesses called by the majority.

Rather than the House Judiciary Committee, which traditionally handles impeachment, Pelosi also deputized the House Intelligence Committee to conduct fact-finding; the Judiciary Committee was turned into a rubber stamp. Schiff held a few public hearings, but often failed to release transcripts containing exculpatory evidence until after they had passed.

In the course of the Intelligence Committee’s investigation, Schiff quietly spied on the telephone records of his Republican counterpart, Ranking Member Devin Nunes (R-CA). He also snooped on the phone records of a journalist, John Solomon; and on the phone records of former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, acting as President Trump’s personal lawyer.

Schiff’s eavesdropping violated both the First Amendment right to press freedom and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Yet he proceeded undeterred by constitutional rights, publishing the phone logs in his committee’s report without warning, confirmation, or explanation, alleging that Nunes and the others were part of a conspiracy to assist the president’s allegedly impeachable conduct. When Republicans on the Judiciary Committee asked the Intelligence Committee’s majority counsel, Daniel Goldman, to explain the phone logs, he refused to answer,

Ironically, Schiff had done exactly what Democrats accuse Trump of doing: abused his power to dig up dirt on political opponents, then obstructed a congressional investigation into his party’s and his committee’s misconduct.

Democrats’ articles of impeachment include one for the dubious charge of “abuse of power,” which is not mentioned in the Constitution; and one for “obstruction of Congress,” which in this case is an abuse of power in itself.

Alexander Hamilton, writing about impeachment in Federalist 65, warned that “there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.” Democrats have fulfilled Hamilton’s worst fears.

The Trump impeachment will soon replace the 1868 impeachment of President Andrew Johnson — which the House Judiciary Committee staff actually cited as a positive precedent — as the worst in American history.

In service of their “coup,” Democrats have trampled the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The Republic has never been in greater danger.

You don't get to interrupt me

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service