Tuesday PM ~ thefrontpagecover

TheFrontPageCover
~ Featuring ~
'scumbag/liar-Schiff Show' Roundup: 
Hill Falsely Smears Republicans
95wzBWm1EyniTyqDx_VQfO5AXfZDLB4JTVD9jBQLPP38_Axt59K1b5WUhnHna3MhYOzYWVkJkzsRSjRuuGwWwwpDSTg-Efm3aljXjFvepMFDBhCd1hGoH6kzV_HhJLRcafISAqeJfOVcx-QaGe198QSChIq1YICr84rympw=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710x
Thomas Gallatin  
AGHnzvDgAIc_dkrUO59jF21LrUmiQ79dA3RIshU-YlAdfSFPOhc54BmJs1OTRtvnrEX-cCbeiMVXdurlydL03p7YzXsWg_6cAavWTIOYU1PogQU4ftAjtXM=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
.
Representative Elise Stefanik
-vs- Maria Bartiromo
Wb_3qsqWsNBBKTlbUHyN9y0ixZtFrCccbbE_Y6vvtfTkzmwO-ype_uHBOKkAnAeYOWI150yRptyPfKsHSkP34NooMfDKXW3I-H6i8CQYcwm2MgtsKVUkp4O_vVoqSa811G9sq_hX-fLUXdjIXgR-0xyIOTdk=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710x
by sundance
{ theconservativetreehouse.com } ~ Representative Elise Stefanik appears on Fox News with Maria Bartiromo to discuss her perspective on the impeachment inquiry... As with all other republican members, including ranking member Devin Nunes and interim member Jim Jordan, Mrs. Stefanik has no idea where the liar-Pelosi, scumbag/liar-Schiff and Lawfare goes from here. Everything seems up-in-the-air. Having listened to three interviews with scumbag/liar-Adam Schiff today as well as scumbag/liar-Shiff’s little toady, scumbag-Eric Swalwell; and watching them also say they don’t actually have an outlined plan of what will come next from their “impeachment inquiry”, it all seems rather odd. It appears Democrat leadership are taking a climate assessment of the electorate before returning to the next, and final, House session on December 2nd. liar-Pelosi, scumbag/liar-Schiff et al  previously committed themselves to a semi-formal process in the House resolution that began the impeachment inquiry.  However, they no longer discuss that process.
.
Congressman Lee Zeldin Discusses 
“Where we go from here”
7OM8j6xM1qZYIs7QZU7IQT5zU-KVntPaf3BvYM0wF_ok92-imMZZQD_01wxBJ_dr2DXtVYftReYH9yRd4VRkP_0PhS_cMVboLNeKztUr4NHFhLML42ckL36pluVHQQQi_xOan2TFiEqWXxXJ=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710x
by sundance
{ theconservativetreehouse.com } ~ Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-NY) discusses the upcoming drafting of a partisan report derived from witness testimony and the likelihood of an independent minority report. Unfortunately Rep. Zeldin, just like scumbag/liar-Adam Schiff and House leadership, is not sure what comes next other than Thanksgiving.
.
Johnson: Impeachment a 
Losing Bet for Democrats
3zsG3Mu05yQ1mzmS5Fbf5RZHxQ5GbPXp9Lb42iZS_CQtOR_a_y1mRLQm2LmRlJXRza_hyDtOWPbLmgJogE8cpuARQkln4wiA4GnqxLR9QeFttq_mHYN6dW9tFbRshvhk38InotlK0CpQJu39eiYxF88676hMm8cVZAU=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710x
by freebeacon.com ~ Washington Free Beacon editor in chief Eliana Johnson on Sunday said impeachment is a losing bet for Democrats as support has fallen since the public hearings before Congress began... "It's looking like a losing bet at this point," Johnson told NBC. "Americans tend not to care a whole lot about foreign policy. I think it was risky for Democrats to pursue impeachment on a question of foreign policy," Johnson said. "Over the past week alone support for impeachment among independents has dropped 7 points. "NBC's Meet the Press host Chuck Todd asked Johnson why it seemed like the two parties talk past each other when it comes to impeachment.  Johnson said Republicans and Democrats are "choosing to emphasize different things." Swing state polls on impeachment indicate it may not be a winning political issue for Democrats. Support for impeachment in the important swing state of Wisconsin fell in the latest  Marquette University Law School poll. Fifty-three percent of voters said they are not supportive of the impeachment and removal of Trump, while 44 percent said they do support impeachment.
.
Sarah Sanders: ‘I’ve Been Called’
To Run For Office
xK9QCQFr9F3Pken0kgWlF0JFEVilHvniDB55X6kdTiFcpRw43LqWSyS0tYF23RuoF4V9GII9aC2NWF-OkB5KpT9lnGoa8BZyzwmE7is6xZI4hTJqPUCjuR4sfXvrmmdLCc4yhz4lP3MVoIvfYOeyNlnQrrmA8edguNnwZfubQgQSbIwAMKkmB6Nf-EYXzbWLxEonTNNSnozuEdPq6yST83UIFG7a=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710x
By  Amanda Prestigiacomo
{ dailywire.com } ~ Since Sarah Sanders left her post as President Donald Trump’s White House Secretary in June, there have been incessant rumors about her probable run for office in Arkansas, likely for the governorship... Those rumors were given a boost on Sunday, when Sanders all but confirmed her run to The New York Times. “There are two types of people who run for office,” the former press secretary told the Times. “People that are called and people that just want to be a senator or governor. I feel like I’ve been called.” In 2023, Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson’s (R) term will be up, leaving Sanders a lane to run. “It’s the role I’ve been pushed into,” the mother of three said. “I wouldn’t want to do that if I wasn’t the right person to fit what the state needed at that time.” Sanders’ potential run in Arkansas, where her father Mike Huckabee served as the state’s Republican governor from 1996 to 2007, has disrupted fellow Arkansas Republicans’ “plans,” the Times notes. “Lt. Gov. Tim Griffin has long been planning a run for governor. And Leslie Rutledge, the attorney general, is also expected to be a contender.”But that doesn’t seem to be an issue for Sanders. “You have to make a decision by Labor Day of 2021,” said Bryan Sanders, the former press secretary’s husband, again adding credence to the run. “She has a unique coalition. It’s not just Trump voters. It’s evangelicals because of her dad. It’s women.”...   https://www.dailywire.com/news/sarah-sanders-ive-been-called-to-run-for-office 
Congress, Defense Industry Warn Against 
Short-Term Federal Spending Deal
4Cv1tG2-V-QAEZHUp4PAycYucQwS3Yrx3bL22Er8VvEasHnuQ3AlT0TxKvL97mUSHhZg5fTjnPXw-24Oc2knzqZ_pCeOmLKCMSqVOMwPDL2NzEidlt3ub6rhern765xXGQ=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710x
By Ben Werner
{ news.usni.org } ~ By agreeing to a second short-term spending bill early in Fiscal Year 2020, Congress and President Donald Trump will keep government agencies open for another month... a move the defense industry says is better than the alternative, but not a great long-term strategy. The temporary spending bill replaced the first stop-gap bill that expired on Thursday. Most on Capitol Hill and in corporate America expected the short-term deal to occur since few believed there was much of an appetite on the Hill or the White House to shutter the government until a budget passed. The new bill keeps the government open until Dec. 20. However, based on recent comments from corporate leaders and lawmakers, the temporary measure, known as a continuing resolution (CR), will not garner much applause from the defense industry or even the very lawmakers who have yet to hammer out an FY 2020 budget. “Two months ago, the Senate’s inability to get to work forced us to pass short-term government spending legislation,” said Rep. Elaine Luria (D-Va.) in a statement. “Today, we are in the same situation. In Hampton Roads, short-term spending harms our local naval operations, shipbuilding industries, and workforce. I urge the Senate to immediately pass its spending bills so we can pass a bill that fully funds the government.” Despite temporarily funding the government, the continuing resolution would freeze spending levels at the Fiscal Year 2019 rate and limits a federal agency’s ability to sign new contracts. “This would cause national uncertainty for the military and defense industries,” said the statement from Luria, who is a member of the House Armed Services Committee. Republicans on the House Armed Services Committee also released a statement detailing the ill-effects of a CR...
.
Are Palestinians Not Entitled to Human Rights?
fj151hy67YKfP2pw0B4FT8MKNOKEqZS41IuZoch3CGGBSjCrsqodqOAPLe8MnAt7vbupzjqVTt6JF2VOuPsbT-9_dQ=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710x
by Bassam Tawil
{ gatestoneinstitute.org } ~ While Palestinian officials repeatedly condemn Israel for violating Palestinians' freedom of expression, it is actually the Palestinian Authority (PA)... that continues to harass, intimidate and detain Palestinians for expressing their opinions on social media or being affiliated with rival political groups. Business as usual. The latest victims of the PA's ongoing assault on public freedoms, particularly freedom of expression, are Palestinian lawyers, judges, political activists and university students. The most recent accusation came after the Israeli authorities closed the offices of a television production company illegally operating in Jerusalem. The offices were shut in accordance with an Israeli law that bans  the PA from operating in Israel, including Jerusalem. This is also business as usual for the international community and foreign media, which remain complicit in the PA's effort to keep the world from learning about human rights violations committed by Palestinians against Palestinians. While several Palestinian officials have, as usual, condemned Israel for acting in accordance with the law, as far as PA leaders are concerned, Palestinians who dare to criticize Palestinian leaders or speak about corruption possess no rights whatsoever. Muhannad Karajeh is a prominent Palestinian lawyer from the PA-ruled West Bank who, for several years, has been defending Palestinians detained by the Palestinians for expressing their views on social media. As such, Karajeh has become quite a headache for the PA and its multiple security forces. The last thing they need is for a savvy lawyer to challenge them on social media and in court. Recently, Karajeh was informed of intention to prosecute him for allegedly violating the controversial Palestinian Cybercrime Law, which allows the PA to take legal action against anyone who publishes "news that would endanger the integrity of the Palestinian state, the public order or the internal or external security of the State." Critics of the law say it is aimed at silencing anyone who dares to criticize the Palestinian Authority leadership and is an infringement on freedom of expression and the media. The PA has since used the law to block access to dozens of news websites considered critical of the Palestinian leadership and its policies...  https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15200/human-rights-palestinians  
.
AGHnzvDgAIc_dkrUO59jF21LrUmiQ79dA3RIshU-YlAdfSFPOhc54BmJs1OTRtvnrEX-cCbeiMVXdurlydL03p7YzXsWg_6cAavWTIOYU1PogQU4ftAjtXM=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
.
'scumbag/liar-Schiff Show' Roundup:
Hill Falsely Smears Republicans
95wzBWm1EyniTyqDx_VQfO5AXfZDLB4JTVD9jBQLPP38_Axt59K1b5WUhnHna3MhYOzYWVkJkzsRSjRuuGwWwwpDSTg-Efm3aljXjFvepMFDBhCd1hGoH6kzV_HhJLRcafISAqeJfOVcx-QaGe198QSChIq1YICr84rympw=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710x
Thomas Gallatin:  If you want to present yourself as a credible, objectively minded, nonpartisan witness, you shouldn’t start by falsely disparaging an entire side of the political aisle. But that’s exactly what former National Security Council official Fiona Hill did in her opening statement on the last day of the House Intelligence Committee’s impeachment hearings. She accused Republicans of not believing that Russia had interfered in the 2016 election and instead propagating a “fictional narrative” that it was Ukraine. So much for her claim of nonpartisanship.

Republicans were quick to take apart Hill’s false accusation, pointedly noting that every single Republican had signed off on the Justice Department’s conclusion that Russia had acted to interfere in the 2016 election. (Not to mention actual Ukrainian interference doesn’t preclude Russian interference.) Upon further questioning, Hill admitted that the accounts of Ukrainian officials working against then-candidate Donald Trump were accurate. “They bet on scumbag/liar-Hillary Clinton winning the election,” she said. “So, you know, they were trying to curry favor with the scumbag/liar-Clinton campaign.”

Furthermore, Hill tacitly gave a plausible reason for Trump’s negative view of Ukraine, stating, “Many [Ukrainian officials] said some pretty disparaging and hateful things about President Trump, and I can’t blame him for feeling aggrieved about that. … I would also take offense to some of the things that were said if I was the president.”

Hill also testified that former National Security Advisor John Bolton expressed to her his negative views of Trump’s personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, calling him a “hand grenade” — a statement he did not elaborate on any further. This reinforced a recurring theme: Many people were frustrated by Giuliani and viewed him as meddlesome.

An important point was also established that the stopping and starting of foreign aid is not an uncommon event. Republican counsel Steve Castor asked Hill, “Is it fair to say … stops and starts in aid like this sometimes do happen?” Hill responded, “That’s correct.” Castor then asked, “I believe you testified there was a freeze put on all kinds of aid and assistance because it was placed in a process of significant reviews of foreign assistance going on?” Hill answered, “That’s correct. … As I understand, there had been a directive for a wholesale review of our … foreign-policy assistance, and the ties … between our foreign-policy objectives and the assistance.”

Democrats also had David Holmes, a political counselor to the U.S. embassy in Ukraine, testify. He dubiously claimed to have overheard a phone conversation between Gordon Sondland and Trump that so alarmed him that … he elected to continue with his vacation plans before deciding to act on it. According to Holmes, he heard Trump ask Sondland how the investigation was going, which Holmes interpreted as the investigation into Barisma and the loose lips liar-Bidens. Needless to say, Holmes offered only hearsay as evidence.

Finally, a statement from soon-to-be-retiring Republican Rep. Will Hurd, a Texas moderate who is no fan of Trump, serves to demonstrate just how badly this impeachment gambit has gone for the Democrats. Hurd said, “I have not heard evidence proving the president committed bribery or extortion.” As liar-Nancy Pelosi writes up articles of impeachment, she faces the very real probability that not one Republican will vote in favor of impeachment while she may even lose two or three Democrats, giving Republicans the bipartisan talking point to level against this obviously partisan sham.   ~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/articles/66953?mailing_id=4681&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4681&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body  

E-mail me when people leave their comments –

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

Join Command Center