The Front Page Cover
~ Featuring ~
Let the Investigation Begin
by The Editors
.
What Justice Alito Said Should Terrify
Every Christian in America
{totalconservative.com} ~ Delivering a commencement speech at St. Charles Borromeo Seminary in Pennsylvania last week, Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito warned the graduates that they were heading out into an America much different from the one he grew up in... Alito left no doubt in the minds of the young men and women that religious freedom was a dying concept in today’s United States. “For most of my life, the American people have been united in their strong respect for religious liberty,” Alito said. “But recently, things have started to change. The idea that speech can be banned if it expresses an idea that is offensive is spreading around the country.” Of course, Alito’s prediction has already begun to materialize. Christian views on marriage are being marginalized as hate speech in mainstream America and it is no longer acceptable in “polite society” to even QUESTION the right of a man to marry another man. And that doesn’t touch on the legal consequences endured by business owners who refuse to be a part of gay wedding ceremonies. Bakeries, florists, T-shirt designers, and even farmers have been persecuted financially for opting out of these ceremonies as anti-discrimination laws are stretched beyond the breaking point... http://totalconservative.com/justice-alito-said-terrify-every-christian-america/.
DNC Chair, CA State Chair Curse GOP,
Trump, Dems From Convention Stage
by Rick Wells
{rickwells.us} ~ If any California Democrats or Democrats in general have any shame left, they might now realize that the Democrat Party is too trashy for them to be a part of... If they don’t see it, they’re probably in the very sewer they belong in and would be out of place among civilized, respectful people. The little wormy radical, DNC Chairman, Thomas Perez, has been incorporating inappropriate behavior and “tough guy” profanity into his speeches since before he was elected DNC Chairman and even more so since. The attack Chihuahua received a dose of his own medicine, being heckled throughout his speech, as others were as well, at the California Democrat convention...How can the dems lets this jerk be their voice? http://rickwells.us/dnc-chair-ca-state-chair-curse-gop-trump-dems-from-convention-stage/
.
Here's why Democrats get their way so often
by Paul Bremmer
{wnd.com} ~ Americans voted for change last Nov. 8. They voted for a man who promised to crack down on illegal immigration, halt the refugee influx and protect the country from terrorist infiltration... But when Donald Trump tried to do those things, he found his path blocked by federal judges. One could forgive Trump voters for wondering whether their votes truly counted in the end. “I think the first few months of the Trump administration has really proven the thesis of my book “Stolen Sovereignty: How to Stop Unelected Judges From Transforming America”, that unless you reform the courts, winning elections doesn’t matter,” said conservative scholar Daniel Horowitz in an appearance on “Frances & Friends."...http://www.wnd.com/2017/05/heres-why-democrats-get-their-way-so-often/
.
.
Best Buds Mueller and Comey Target Trump
by Cliff Kincaid
{gopusa.com} ~ The Washington Post, a mouthpiece for liar-nObama holdovers in the CIA and other agencies, reports that “sources” say a current White House official is under investigation... as “a significant person of interest” in Russia-gate, but that the sources “would not further identify the official.” This is a case of anonymous officials talking about an anonymous official. Interestingly, the term “person of interest” was used by the FBI against scientist Steven Hatfill in the post-9/11anthrax letters case. He was totally innocent and the Department of Justice paid him $5.8 million in damages. After dismissing Hatfill and several others as suspects, the FBI blamed a dead U.S. Army scientist, Bruce Ivins. However, evidence indicates that the more likely culprits were al-Qaeda operatives who got the anthrax from a U.S. lab. The truth was too embarrassing for the FBI to reveal...http://www.gopusa.com/?p=24713?omhide=true.
During Notre Dame commencement, VP Mike Pence slams intolerance for free speech on college campuses
.
ABC's Stephanopoulos to Gen. McMaster: The Saudis Consistently Back Terrorism, Do You Think They Are Ready To Change?
.
liar-Clinton aide Huma Abedin’s husband, Anthony Weiner sobs, telling judge he's sick as he faces years in prison for sexting to a minor
.
TUCKER: Dershowitz Says Special Counsel Will Help Trump: "He's Going to Find No Crime"
.
Rep. Darrell Issa (R., Calif.) Slams Comey: "He Had Become in Love With the Camera"
.
.
by The Editors
{weeklystandard.com} ~ This week Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed a special counsel to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election. It was an important move, and one that President Donald Trump made unavoidable with his erratic and irresponsible behavior over the past fortnight.
It all began on May 9 when Trump fired FBI director James Comey. For two days, the White House misled the American public about how and why this dismissal took place. The White House emphasized Comey's handling of the probe into liar-nHillary Clinton's email server, which Rosenstein had reviewed and criticized in a memorandum for his boss, Attorney General Jeff Sessions. The attorney general, in turn, had recommended a change of leadership at the FBI. President Trump, his spokespeople insisted, was simply implementing this recommendation.
White House officials were working hard to create the impression that the decision to fire Comey had originated somewhere other than in the Oval Office. But the claim was false. The president had asked that the case against Comey be constructed to justify a decision he'd already made. Rosenstein later told the Senate that he'd known Comey would be fired even before he drafted his memorandum. In an interview with NBC News's Lester Holt on May 11, Trump acknowledged that the decision to fire Comey was his alone and one he was going to make without regard to what Rosenstein and Sessions recommended. "I was going to fire Comey," he said. "My decision."
On May 12, Trump threatened the ex-FBI director on Twitter: "James Comey better hope that there are no 'tapes' of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!" With Trump, there's always the temptation to dismiss such outbursts as adolescent bluster. But he has a long history of surreptitious taping in his business career, and White House spokesman Sean Spicer refused to deny that Trump was recording Oval Office conversations when asked repeatedly about the possibility.
On May 15, the Washington Post reported that Trump had disclosed highly classified information in an Oval Office meeting with Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov and the Russian ambassador to the United States, Sergey Kislyak. The intelligence, related to the threat of ISIS-engineered explosives concealed in laptop computers, came from an ally and was allegedly shared without its permission. The White House at first categorically denied the claims, calling the story "as reported . . . false." But in public comments over the next 48 hours, officials confirmed many of the details.
On May 16, the New York Times reported that Comey had written official memos about each of his interactions with Trump. In one of them, describing a meeting with Trump in the Oval Office on February 14, Comey claims that Trump asked him to end the FBI's investigation of former national security adviser Michael Flynn. "I hope you can let this go," Trump told Comey. The White House has denied that this happened.
The next day, Rosenstein named former FBI director Robert Mueller special counsel for the investigation of "the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 election." The order allows Mueller to investigate "any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation."
The White House initially welcomed the news. "As I have stated many times," the president said in a press release, "a thorough investigation will confirm what we already know—there was no collusion between my campaign and any foreign entity. I look forward to this matter concluding quickly." But by early Thursday morning, May 18, the worm had turned and Trump had taken to Twitter: "With all of the illegal acts that took place in the liar-Clinton campaign & liar-nObama Administration, there was never a special councel [sic] appointed!" And "This is the single greatest witch hunt of a politician in American history!"
What to make of all this? There certainly is plenty to investigate. And the question of who should properly do the investigating is a knotty one, admitting of no simple answer. The liabilities of special prosecutors are well known and have been articulated in these pages on several occasions over the last two decades: Such investigations can spin out of control; prosecutors can feel undue pressure to seek scalps, so as to justify work that has stretched out for months or years; and so on.
Let the Investigation Begin
{weeklystandard.com} ~ This week Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed a special counsel to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election. It was an important move, and one that President Donald Trump made unavoidable with his erratic and irresponsible behavior over the past fortnight.
It all began on May 9 when Trump fired FBI director James Comey. For two days, the White House misled the American public about how and why this dismissal took place. The White House emphasized Comey's handling of the probe into liar-nHillary Clinton's email server, which Rosenstein had reviewed and criticized in a memorandum for his boss, Attorney General Jeff Sessions. The attorney general, in turn, had recommended a change of leadership at the FBI. President Trump, his spokespeople insisted, was simply implementing this recommendation.
White House officials were working hard to create the impression that the decision to fire Comey had originated somewhere other than in the Oval Office. But the claim was false. The president had asked that the case against Comey be constructed to justify a decision he'd already made. Rosenstein later told the Senate that he'd known Comey would be fired even before he drafted his memorandum. In an interview with NBC News's Lester Holt on May 11, Trump acknowledged that the decision to fire Comey was his alone and one he was going to make without regard to what Rosenstein and Sessions recommended. "I was going to fire Comey," he said. "My decision."
On May 12, Trump threatened the ex-FBI director on Twitter: "James Comey better hope that there are no 'tapes' of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!" With Trump, there's always the temptation to dismiss such outbursts as adolescent bluster. But he has a long history of surreptitious taping in his business career, and White House spokesman Sean Spicer refused to deny that Trump was recording Oval Office conversations when asked repeatedly about the possibility.
On May 15, the Washington Post reported that Trump had disclosed highly classified information in an Oval Office meeting with Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov and the Russian ambassador to the United States, Sergey Kislyak. The intelligence, related to the threat of ISIS-engineered explosives concealed in laptop computers, came from an ally and was allegedly shared without its permission. The White House at first categorically denied the claims, calling the story "as reported . . . false." But in public comments over the next 48 hours, officials confirmed many of the details.
On May 16, the New York Times reported that Comey had written official memos about each of his interactions with Trump. In one of them, describing a meeting with Trump in the Oval Office on February 14, Comey claims that Trump asked him to end the FBI's investigation of former national security adviser Michael Flynn. "I hope you can let this go," Trump told Comey. The White House has denied that this happened.
The next day, Rosenstein named former FBI director Robert Mueller special counsel for the investigation of "the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 election." The order allows Mueller to investigate "any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation."
The White House initially welcomed the news. "As I have stated many times," the president said in a press release, "a thorough investigation will confirm what we already know—there was no collusion between my campaign and any foreign entity. I look forward to this matter concluding quickly." But by early Thursday morning, May 18, the worm had turned and Trump had taken to Twitter: "With all of the illegal acts that took place in the liar-Clinton campaign & liar-nObama Administration, there was never a special councel [sic] appointed!" And "This is the single greatest witch hunt of a politician in American history!"
What to make of all this? There certainly is plenty to investigate. And the question of who should properly do the investigating is a knotty one, admitting of no simple answer. The liabilities of special prosecutors are well known and have been articulated in these pages on several occasions over the last two decades: Such investigations can spin out of control; prosecutors can feel undue pressure to seek scalps, so as to justify work that has stretched out for months or years; and so on.
Comments