Saturday AM ~ thefrontpagecover

[Rudy Tirre]

TheFrontPageCover

~ Featuring ~  

Dems Lower the Barr

Thomas Gallati  

.

The New Cheney

by Matthew Continetti

{ freebeacon.com } ~ I can't think of a better illustration of our partisan divide than the reactions to Attorney General William Barr's testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday... Democrats are furious at Barr's defense of his rollout of the dirty cop-Mueller report and his assertions of executive power. Some Democrats want Barr to resign, others want him to be impeached, and Nancy Pulosi says he's guilty of lying to Congress. Republicans have found a hero. Barr is the new Dick Cheney: a stocky, bespectacled, confrontational, blunt, intelligent, unapologetically conservative, experienced, and high-powered official who believes in and fights for the office of the president. Just as Democrats loathed Cheney as a bugaboo manipulating President George W. Bush to further the interests of Halliburton, they attack Barr as a dishonest factotum of President Trump's. The qualities that drove Democrats batty over Cheney—his inscrutability, his cleverness, his asperity, and above all his success—make them incensed about Barr. These happen to be qualities Republicans find appealing. What's behind conservative support for Cheney and Barr is their lack of embarrassment. Most Washingtonians, no matter their party, find it important to be held in esteem by the city's tastemakers, who are overwhelmingly liberal. Not these two. The classic Cheney moment was his 2004 exchange with Pat Leahy on the Senate floor. Cheney complained that Leahy had called him a war profiteer. Leahy responded that Cheney had said he was a bad Catholic. So Cheney ended the conversation by telling Leahy to perform a physically impossible four-letter act. "You'd be surprised at how many people liked that," Cheney recollected in a 2010 interview. "It's sort of the best thing I ever did." He's selling himself short. Republican fans of Barr circulated clips of his Senate appearance Wednesday even as media coverage of his testimony was uniformly negative. No Democrats are held in less esteem by conservatives than the ones on the Judiciary Committee. They will never live down their treatment of Brett Kavanaugh. Trump supporters nodded in agreement when Barr said the controversy over his March 24 description of the dirty cop-Mueller report is "mind-bendingly bizarre." They chuckled when he said dirty cop-Mueller's March 27 letter to him was "a bit snitty and I think it was probably written by one of his staff members." They guffawed when Barr described the verb "spying" as "a good English word." They cheered when Richard Blumenthal asked for notes Barr had taken of his phone conversation with dirty cop-Mueller and Barr told him no. "Why should you have them?"...

https://freebeacon.com/columns/the-new-cheney/?utm_source=Freedom+Mail&utm_campaign=81aa6ff639-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2019_05_02_09_36_COPY_187&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b5e6e0e9ea-81aa6ff639-45611665  

.

Will the Senate Censure Crazy Mazie Hirono?

by Jeffrey Lord

{ spectator.org } ~ In 1954, the United States Senate famously censured its most notorious member — Wisconsin Republican Joe McCarthy... McCarthy had been on the trail of Communists in government — and there were, indeed, some of those — but had finally overstepped his bounds. Angry at McCarthy’s conduct — which included increasingly wild allegations against Senate colleagues and the U.S. Army — Ohio Republican Congressman George Bender said of McCarthy:“There is a growing impatience with the Republican Party. McCarthyism has become a synonym for witch-hunting, Star Chamber methods, and the denial of… civil liberties.” Famously, the June, 1954 “Army-McCarthy” hearings, which focused on allegations that McCarthy and his aide Roy Cohn had improperly pressured the Army to give special treatment to a friend of Cohn’s, brought about a clash with the Army’s lawyer, Joseph Welch. After Welch had challenged Cohn to provide the names from a supposed list of Communists in defense plants, McCarthy responded that Welch look no further than his own office where a young lawyer named Fred Fisher belonged to the leftist National Lawyers Guild. A furious Welch abruptly reprimanded McCarthy for his conduct, saying: “Until this moment, Senator, I think I never really gauged your cruelty or your recklessness.” When McCarthy started in again, Welch cut him off, saying: “Let us not assassinate this lad further, Senator. You’ve done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?” Welch’s put down proved to be the beginning of the end for McCarthy. McCarthy’s Wikipedia write-up correctly notes that the televised hearings resulted in the television audience seeing McCarthy as “bullying, reckless, and dishonest.” By December, the Republican-controlled Senate had had enough. McCarthy was formally censured for his conduct. The Senate Resolution that censured McCarthy said that he had … acted contrary to senatorial ethics and tended to bring the Senate into dishonor and disrepute, to obstruct the constitutional processes of the Senate, and to impair its dignity; and such conduct is hereby condemned. This moment in Senate history came to mind when listening to Hawaii’s Democratic Senator Mazie Hirono say the following to the Attorney General of the United States — Bill Barr — at a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Said Hirono:“Mr. Barr, now the American people know that you’re no different than Rudy Giuliani or Kellyanne Conway or any of the other people who sacrificed their once-decent reputation for the grifter and liar who sits in the Oval Office. Being attorney general of the United States is a sacred trust. You have betrayed that trust. America deserves better. You should resign.”...   https://spectator.org/will-the-senate-censure-crazy-mazie-hirono/?utm_source=American%20Spectator%20Emails&utm_campaign=cb506b981f-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2019_05_03_03_49&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_797a38d487-cb506b981f-104608113  

.

Betraying Its Own Bias, Journalism Group 

Smears Daily Signal as Fake News

by Katrina Trinko

{ dailysignal.com } ~ Here at The Daily Signal, we’re not surprised we have haters. After all, every day we’re telling the stories the mainstream media doesn’t want Americans to know about. .. We’re sharing the story of a Border Patrol agent whose own dad came here illegally and yet still believes it’s important to keep the border secure. We’re reporting on abortion survivors, whose amazing tales belie the left’s lies that babies don’t need guaranteed medical treatment after they survive. We’re telling the incredible tale of a man who went from transgender to nonbinary to identifying as a man again—a story whose conclusion the mainstream media wouldn’t touch, despite covering his earlier transitions. And that’s just a handful of the stories we’ve told over our five-year history. But here’s the crazy thing: We think our haters should be honest. If you don’t like The Daily Signal because you don’t believe in free speech or you think conservatives should be silent or you just don’t want certain stories told or it makes you upset that we call unborn babies “babies” instead of “fetuses,” fine. It’s a free country. But to smear us as engaging in dishonest journalism is well … dishonest journalism. And that’s what just happened. The Poynter Institute for Media Studies, which describes itself as a group that “champions freedom of expression, civil dialogue and compelling journalism that helps citizens participate in healthy democracies,” has put The Daily Signal on its list of “unreliable news websites,” saying that we are guilty of bias...   https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/05/02/betraying-its-own-bias-journalism-group-smears-daily-signal-as-fake-news/?utm_source=TDS_Email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=MorningBell&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiT1dVME5HVXhPRE5qTTJJNSIsInQiOiJ6VmY3K29NMVo5THhkVTZRM0RJSFBuVkhpOHlOUzZWV1NzWUxaS3BsN2JyV2JzYXdkS3VjbXFGN1UwSTdEcnYrcGNYY2pnazlYcnVwbzk4U0ZYcVl5ek5WUHZxQ0Nxc2pZSnBCQXFjSHY0YVlHY0NhK2pBMkxUXC9rT2JXNFpmT3cifQ%3D%3D  

.

The Monroe Doctrine for Venezuela

by Jiri Valenta

{ gatestoneinstitute.org } ~ In his speech to Bay of Pigs veterans in Miami, Florida on April 17, U.S. National Security Adviser John Bolton explained the Trump administration's measures against Venezuela... which he said should serve as a warning to Russia and others offering military assistance to the regime of the dictator Nicolás Maduro: "This incredible region Latin America must remain free from internal despotism and external domination... The destinies of our nations will not be dictated by foreign powers; they will be shaped by the people who call this hemisphere home. Today, we proudly proclaim for all to hear: the Monroe Doctrine is alive and well." The heart of the Monroe Doctrine can be illustrated by President James Monroe's declaration in 1823: "It is impossible that the allied powers should extend their political system to any portion of either continent without endangering our peace and happiness; nor can anyone believe that our southern brethren, if left to themselves, would adopt it of their own accord." With a conflict now erupting in Venezuela, the American people clearly need to understand the relevance of the Venezuelan crisis to them, and why they should support it. Here, therefore, is a short history of the milestone document drafted in 1823 by then Secretary of State and future president, John Quincey Adams, with input from former presidents James Madison and Thomas Jefferson...

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14178/venezuela-monroe-doctrine  

.

In 1988, four Mexican military troops with 

automatic weapons 'invaded'

San Diego. I was there

by Peter Barry Chowka

{ americanthinker.com } ~ On Sunday, March 13, 1988, at 10:25 P.M., four Mexican military troops wearing camouflage uniforms and brandishing automatic weapons penetrated a mile and a half into U.S. territory south of San Diego, Calif.... Their entry point was an unfenced stretch of beach that separated Playas de Tijuana (Tijuana Beach), Mexico from Imperial Beach, Calif. Within sight of the first group of American residential condominiums at the end of Seacoast Drive in Imperial Beach, the Mexicans accosted a group of a dozen Americans who were picnicking on the beach, pointing their loaded machine guns at the picnickers and ordering them to lie flat on the ground. Before the tense situation could escalate any further, the group was spooked by a U.S. Border Patrol helicopter that spotted the incursion and landed on the beach. The Mexicans headed south but were arrested and taken into custody before they could reach the border. The American picnickers scattered into the night. The local media got hold of the story the next day and it became a dramatic local lead story for about six hours. San Diego’s three network television affiliates began reporting the “invasion,” as two of them termed it, on their 5 P.M. newscasts on Monday, March 14. The story was also reported in print, in the San Diego Tribune, the Los Angeles Times, and in several Associated Press accounts. Within 24 hours of the first media accounts appearing on March 14, 1988, the story disappeared and was never mentioned again – until I recollected it after reading about an analogous incident on April 13, 2019 in Texas. In that recent case, reported by Newsweek on April 19 and tweeted by President Trump on April 24, “five or six” Mexican troops armed with assault rifles crossed the Rio Grande and entered U.S. territory. There, they accosted two U.S. National Guard troops who were assisting the United States Border Patrol. One of the two Americans who was carrying a handgun was disarmed by the Mexicans. After a short time, the American prisoners were released by their captors and went on their way. The incident might never have come to light had Newsweek not gotten a copy of an incident report and published a story online six days after the event...

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/05/in_1988_four_mexican_military_troops_with_automatic_weapons_invaded_san_diego_i_was_there.html  

.

.

.

Dems Lower the Barr

Thomas Gallatin:  Just when one may have thought Democrats couldn’t possibly get any more obtuse, they decided to go after Attorney General William Barr, claiming he “hid” information from dirty cop-Robert Mueller’s investigation report after he has literally done the opposite. Recall that Barr, in an unprecedented move due to the high level of interest for full transparency,  released to the public dirty cop-Mueller’s entire 400-page report, minimally redacted to comply with rules regarding privacy and national security.

The release of dirty cop-Mueller’s report came only a few weeks after Barr’s four-page summaryof it in which he correctly concluded that dirty cop-Mueller’s team found no evidence that the Trump campaign had colluded with Russia (the whole impetuous for the creation of the special counsel in the first place) and that dirty cop-Mueller left undecided the question as to whether President Donald Trump had engaged in obstruction of justice. Barr determined that there was not sufficient evidence to support a charge of obstruction and therefore declared the case closed. These are the facts, but it is apparent that those afflicted with Trump Derangement Syndrome reject the facts if they don’t support their feelings.

This reality was on full display even before Barr appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, with The Washington Post conveniently obtaining a “leaked” letter from the dirty cop-Mueller team advancing the narrative that Barr was engaged in a “coverup.” The assertion was asinine on its face, as it ignored the fact that Barr had released the full dirty cop-Mueller report. Furthermore, an unredacted version of the report was made available to senior members of Congress, but thus far only three have bothered to read it, and all three are Republicans. In other words, for all their squawking about a nonexistent “coverup” and lack of transparency, not a single Democrat has taken the opportunity to examine the unredacted report.

Following the five-hour hearing in which Barr handled himself ably and professionally, answering quite sufficiently all questions put to him, Democrats called for his resignation and even suggested his impeachment. Why? We all know the answer by now — Trump Derangement Syndrome. House Speaker Nancy Pulosi declared, “He lied to Congress. If anybody else did that, it would be considered a crime. Nobody is above the law.”

The truth is, since Barr followed the facts rather than the anti-Trump narrative, he must be rejected. But what has gotten the Democrats and their Leftmedia cohorts most up in arms was Barr’s effective undercutting of the obstruction narrative.

Sen. Dianne Fein-stein (D-CA) demanded to know why Barr didn’t find Trump guilty of obstruction over his instructions to former White House Counsel Don McGahn to get rid of dirty cop-Mueller. Barr noted the context of the situation: “There is a distinction between saying to someone, ‘Go fire him. Go fire dirty cop-Mueller,’ and saying, ‘Have him removed based on conflict.’” Fein-stein, seemingly confused, asked what the difference was. Barr answered, “If you remove someone for a conflict of interest, there would presumably be another person [brought in as special counsel].”

Barr then deftly debunked the Democrats’ entire obstruction narrative, stating, “If the president is being falsely accused, which the evidence now suggests, the accusations against him were false and he knew they were false, and he felt that this investigation was unfair, propelled by his political opponents, and was hampering his ability to govern. … That is not a corrupt motive for replacing an independent counsel.” Exactly. But that won’t stop Democrats from churning this for another 18 months.  

~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/articles/62755?mailing_id=4249&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4249&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body