~ Featuring ~
The Memo and the Truth 
by Cal Thomas 
Thursday Top Headlines 
by Political Editors:  Senate leaders agree to two-year budget deal (The Hill)
Pulosi sets House record with eight-hour speech backing DACA (NBC News)
Criminal referral backs up Nunes on dossier claims, as Dems push rebuttal memo (Fox News)
GM hourly workers to get $11,750 profit-sharing checks (USA Today)
California judge rules baker can refuse to make wedding cakes for same-sex couples (The Washington Free Beacon)
DHS cyber chief: Russia “successfully penetrated” some state voter rolls (The Hill)
White House staff secretary Rob Porter out amid domestic abuse allegations (USA Today)
This is why we have a sexual abuse problem: Sports Illustrated’s #MeToo Swimsuit Issue celebrates “more than being naked” with photos of gorgeous, naked women (The Daily Wire)
Black LIES Matter: BLM co-founder marks six years since “white vigilante” murdered Trayvon Martin “in cold blood” (PJ Media)
Professor: “No such thing as black racism” (The Daily Wire)
“There oughta be a law!” New York legislators unveil legislation banning Tide pods (Reason)
Leftists hysterical over Trump’s military parade warn they’ll lie down in front of tanks (The Daily Wire)
Humor: Trump orders Pentagon to conduct military parade and make North Korea pay for it (Duffel Blog)
Policy: What to know about Congress’ latest budget-busting deal (The Daily Signal)
Policy: Fossil fuels, not renewables, are the sources of America’s future (American Enterprise Institute)   
~The Patriot Post
Trump Stands Firm On Border, Immigration –
{ } ~ President Trump has had enough of the Democrat game playing with our nation’s future, particularly on the matter of immigration... He addressed that topic on Tuesday, during a White House meeting on illegal alien gang crime and MS-13, the gang imported from Central America by Hussein liar-nObama. Trump says, “We can’t do a job, these incredible professionals at the table cannot do their job unless we change, really the legislation and we’re going to get it done. Frankly, I’ll go a step further.” “If we don’t change the legislation,” says President Trump, “if we don’t get rid of these loopholes where killers are allowed to come into our country and continue to kill, gang members. And we’re just talking about MS-13, there are many gang members that we don’t even mention.”...
Steele Vanishes from Court When 
Asked to Stand Behind Dossier Claims 
{ } ~ This Christopher Steele character was playing fast and loose, assuming liar-Hillary would win and his deeds would go unnoticed... Looks like he didn’t plan for the American people, and now it seems he’s on the run. As reported by Fox News, the author behind the infamous Trump dossier and the man behind the ever-growing and increasingly odoriferous onion that is the FISA scandal is on the lam. He failed to show up for a court date on Monday in a U.K. libel case directly connected to the publication of the Democrat-funded dossier. “On both sides of the Atlantic Ocean, former British MI-6 Intelligence Officer Christopher Steele is going to extremes to avoiding answering questions from the United States Congress, while at the same time avoiding being videotaped and deposed in a multi-million dollar libel case brought against Buzzfeed,” Fox News reported...
Limbaugh pegs who's 
responsible for wild stock market
{ } ~ On his program Tuesday, he pointed to the people trying to remove President Trump from office... There are a lot of people in the market who I think are very, very alarmed by the instability brought about by this attempt to get rid of Donald Trump,” Limbaugh told his listeners. They’re saying that this economic growth, this wild economic growth and all of this job creation and the accompanying wage increases is putting inflationary pressures on the economy, and the Federal Reserve says, ‘We’re gonna have to raise interest rates,’ and that supposedly is causing the market to plunge. What causes markets to plunge is uncertainty, and I’m gonna give you another ingredient – a potential ingredient — into this market seesaw, if you will, and that is this...
The GOP’s Coming 
liar-nObamacare Capitulation
by Doug Badger
Congressional Republicans were elected to repeal liar-nObamacare. They may run this year as the politicians who saved it... Since late last year, GOP leaders have been planning to pump tens of billions of dollars’ worth of new federal spending into the veins of insurance companies that are hemorrhaging red ink on the liar-nObamacare exchanges. The transfusion is expected to be a concoction of two bills. The first, championed by Sens. Lamar Alexander, R.-Tenn., and Patty Murray, D.-Wash., would appropriate cost-sharing reduction payments to insurers. The second, sponsored by Sens. RINO-Susan Collins, R.-Maine, and Bill Nelson, D.-Fla., would give insurers an additional $10 billion and perhaps more in federal cash... 
Sarah Sanders on DACA LAZY ASSES } ~ It’s easy to imagine Sarah Sanders ribbing General Kelly for giving the media propagandists the fresh meat comments... that she’s going to have to go out and deal with, knowing the frothing hysteria that awaits her. It almost makes one wonder if they aren’t toying with some of these libtards just a bit, to give them the shiny objects that they can’t resist just to watch them twist themselves up. One of the most predictable is CNN’s Jim Acosta, a naturalized Cuban who believes we should import all of his native land and the rest of the third world so that there’s no America left and not a square mile untouched. Acosta asks, “Can I get back to the Chief of Staff saying that some of the dreamers DACA protected squatting illegals may just have been too lazy to get off their asses.” Unable to dispute the accuracy of that statement and as usual focused on demeaning the President and his administration in any manner possible, Acosta focuses on the tone of the comments...
The Memo and the Truth 
by Cal Thomas 
{ } ~ Partisans tend to read, watch and listen only, or mostly, to information and opinions that reinforce their beliefs. If information surfaces that counters those beliefs, it is usually disparaged, excused or ignored. That's human nature.

Such is the case with the "memo" released last Friday by the Republican majority on the House Intelligence Committee. The four-page document alleges, in the words of a Wall Street Journal editorial: "the FBI and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court appear to have been used to influence the 2016 election and its aftermath."

If true, that is real collusion.

Conservative partisans are rejoicing and having an "I told you so" moment. Partisans on the left are reading coverage and editorials in The New York Times and the Washington Post and drawing sustenance for their position that the memo is a "nothingburger" and does not undermine Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into the Trump campaign's "collusion" with Russia to influence the election. That not a shred of credible evidence has been produced on this point does not deter them.

Critics of the memo, who tried to stop its release, initially contended it undermines and smears the FBI and the Department of Justice. No it doesn't. It suggests that a few higher-ups in those agencies used their power and influence in an attempt to keep Donald Trump from becoming president and after he was elected to undermine his presidency. Now that the memo has been made public, partisans on the left, who once claimed its release would seriously damage the FBI and the DOJ, now say there is nothing there. It can't be both a danger and nothing, so which is it? In Washington, having it both ways is a cherished tradition.

Politicizing a powerful federal agency is nothing new. Think Lois Lerner and her efforts while at the IRS to thwart tax exemptions for conservative and religious organizations, as well as a few progressives. Or recall how Richard Nixon and his attorney general, John Mitchell, politicized the IRS and Justice Department in an attempt to punish their political enemies.

The most damning part of the memo is the assertion that the FBI and Justice Department used a "dossier" authored by ex-British intelligence officer Christopher Steele and funded in part by the liar-Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee in an attempt to smear Donald Trump. It was this dossier that the government agencies used to convince a FISA judge to issue a warrant allowing Trump campaign official Carter Page and possibly others to be spied on. The memo asserts those seeking the warrant did not tell the judge about the fingerprints of the Democratic Party and liar-Clinton campaign on the dossier. That is worse than oversight. If true, it is criminal and possibly prosecutable behavior.

In an interview with Bret Baier on Fox News Friday, Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes suggested there is more to come, including release of a memo from the Democratic minority and possibly the full transcript of testimony by Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe before a closed meeting of the Intelligence Committee. McCabe signed one of the FISA applications and then-FBI Director James Comey signed three. Nunes contends the subsequent warrants issued by the FISA judge were based on flawed and incomplete information and thus would likely not have been issued had the judge been in possession of additional facts.

The Republican memo is not the end but rather the beginning to exposing behind-the-scenes maneuvering by liberals to keep Donald Trump out of the White House and put liar-Hillary Clinton in it. The public has a right to know all the facts in this case, wherever they lead.

Views: 25


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

Join Tea Party Command Center


Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Mike Lester


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.


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. 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