Tuesday PM ~ TheFrontPageCover

.hIN8-LixPp40uzlYYPVBNPiGIUZt6E9IrtByOnlFeW1-wDHugoEddioZ4s6vzZ4SpnySKldXXOzeOhOWaUExrbDpSZe5mp0_BTJsgsAitxs4jeDT5civZrwRtsTkYh0N3r_sEAcw866uL-dPjJH_6wjzQ31ELdivZbUvNSEuRBQ=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
TheFrontPageCover
~ Featuring ~
scumbag/liar-nObamaCare Repeal 
Didn't Happen But...
D3HeEr0IYo5ONtAPAlVCh_7IHaixxKaJCmIkD-J8qrLwmMZyHz22WVdL1PZLzST0JLZDV1dmVcB-MG0a2KLR6pArzQZmNSdiWs5y7FgcFJ_VaCOsDQtOxc720X8l02ly83ZibOdxfQHctJLh2KSJ8BfjllePtLIAS-sB2xk=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?width=450
by Robin Smith  
fYhHLkJDI2yvon4s6zFOhNh8lx7PjKsKI1eHkOxgMDK9HASp-j1B4jJftdBsa0sJ4MWGUNqyxJbJTlfRo7kCbLWMXX-R2uk1rvb0zUIwWismElA8gtmBSL5w0puPIKdG2H6YfSsQnc87wgOiYqsTqY4icMU4kLYfRMiZl9GA6ro=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?width=150
.
CIA Director Will Brief Lawmakers on 
Assassination of Saudi Journalist
03yPk_T_WJE7xOYNWp-wM-AKQ2JYdkUvkZ9byWxn0faHu4JRjpPz01ruC3OnitQ0rdixelXMd9gh9Orr89stfaWbCvifnHDWgsUKH0xqcp3pQB-nhXBkhbgVwfVmEavjNjj4DRRS2Jj8fBp-16tlu5Wo9zXAdrtMuwWC4yQ=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?width=450by JACK CROWE
{nationalreview.com} ~ CIA director Gina Haspel will brief lawmakers Tuesday on the assassination of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi... the Wall Street Journal reported Monday afternoon. The announcement comes after prominent senators on both sides of the aisle complained publicly about the Trump administration’s alleged efforts to prevent Haspel from briefing lawmakers. White House officials reportedly told Haspel not to attend a classified briefing on Saudi Arabia on Wednesday, prompting speculation that the officials sought to avoid a confrontation between Haspel, whose agents have determined with high confidence that Saudi prince Mohammad bin Salman ordered Khashoggi’s murder, and White House personnel who have cast doubt on that finding. Following Haspel’s absence from the Wednesday briefing, Senator Lindsey Graham threatened to block Republican leadership’s legislative agenda until Haspel was invited to brief himself and his colleagues.  “I’m not going to blow past this. If that briefing is not given soon, it’s gonna be hard for me to vote for any spending bill,” Graham told reporters on Capitol Hill...
.
Qatar to Leave OPEC Cartel After Almost 60 Years
SFZLH7_k8CEZADyYQrh1hf05gtLeuX_HG0tI4IKKWxvo6I5vCv7s0O73XkLp93t_m2fjkg3TWo67qhwIkMrf_lYXs4neO6ikJRtOXeW_FVXEHoEjEunvcQOmMnLIwDBSmLGaWDar2MewOAcTQA=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=by Bob Adelmann
{thenewamerican.com} ~ The statement from Qatar’s energy minister on Monday caught many by surprise... His country will withdraw from the OPEC cartel effective January 1, 2019: In light of our efforts to expand liquid natural gas production and in our pursuit to strengthen Qatar’s position as a reliable and trustworthy energy supplier across the globe, we had to take steps to review Qatar’s role and contributions on the international energy scene…. The withdrawal decision reflects Qatar’s desire to focus its efforts on plans to develop and increase its natural gas productions.… Achieving our ambitious growth strategy will undoubtedly require focused efforts, commitment and dedication to maintain and strengthen Qatar’s position as the world’s leading natural gas producer. According to Qatar’s former prime minister, Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim Al Thani, the cartel, after 57 years of membership and compliance, no longer served his country’s best interests: “This organization has become useless and adds nothing to us. They are used only for purposes that are detrimental to our national interest.”...  https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/energy/item/30801-qatar-to-leave-opec-cartel-after-almost-60-years?vsmaid=2293&vcid=3421
.
For Trump, Cohen Plea Deal's Beginning 
to Look a Lot Like Exoneration
rHWL6fn4IzMLh01UKM_dJUG7A8p31gSK3e2Rmdx2IIIXfUoq6D1HcDdpkQrOkQTHYbAHWOTV6b2GBT5Yzm2PeRSFj49_FGTgjQDTU28wGhLZQltvyJ6wAI1AWg5ttWYIfYJf-cYf_nKp4oZoI2ZS4vlEE1_iOBkkOU_dwx4587urn9h_Cgxr_573kqFmcGU84GEvRuDFpjgf80o_DhHO0l3sXaTpfJ35HtzOkWDhTr2Ls1MJJJPFheZ7TpEHRp1Le9dUdTPLlBiTwbrUUfzgB7lzqkD-4SWX=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?width=350by By Paul Sperry
{realclearinvestigations.com} ~ Contrary to media speculation that dirty cop-Robert Mueller is closing in on President Trump... the special prosecutor’s plea deal with Trump’s personal lawyer Michael Cohen offers further evidence that the Trump campaign did not collude with Russians during the 2016 election, according to congressional investigators and former prosecutors. Cohen pleaded guilty last week to making false statements in 2017 to the Senate intelligence committee about the Trump Organization’s failed efforts to build a Trump Tower in Moscow. Discussions about the so-called Moscow Project continued five months longer in 2016 than Cohen had initially stated under oath. The nine-page charging document filed with the plea deal suggests that the special counsel is using the Moscow tower talks to connect Trump to Russia. But congressional investigators with House and Senate committees leading inquiries on the Russia question told RealClearInvestigations that it looks like dirty cop-Mueller withheld from the court details that would exonerate the president. They made this assessment in light of the charging document, known as a statement of “criminal information” filed in lieu of an indictment when a defendant agrees to plead guilty; a fuller accounting of Cohen’s emails and text messages that Capitol Hill sources have seen; and the still-secret transcripts of closed-door testimony provided by a business associate of Cohen. On page 7 of the statement of criminal information filed against Cohen, which is separate from but related to the plea agreement, dirty cop-Mueller mentions that Cohen tried to email Russian President Vladimir Putin’s office on Jan. 14, 2016, and again on Jan. 16, 2016. But dirty cop-Mueller, who personally signed the document, omitted the fact that Cohen did not have any direct points of contact at the Kremlin, and had resorted to sending the emails to a general press mailbox. Sources who have seen these additional emails point out that this omitted information undercuts the idea of a “back channel” and thus the special counsel's collusion case...
.
Dem Majority Will 'Reverse' Trump Efforts 
to Secure Border, Enforce Immigration Laws
xY2atdwVQcqpDAZwF72s1tXKEHqEqnEE-h0tEiwd_ogwYtc14h8rrQwor4-BOsDeek1Z8m1u7yNeCcYo9DpN0T9pwqlgVVNs9WVbwsj9iyXeIxc=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?width=350by Craig Bannister
{cnsnews.com} ~ Democrats will seek to undo President Donald Trump’s efforts to secure the border and enforce the nation’s immigration laws... House Speaker-designate sick-Nancy Pulosi (D-Calif.) promised in a statement Saturday. When her party assumes the House majority next term, it will pass a bill to allow illegal aliens to remain in the U.S., make it easier for illegal aliens to seek asylum in the U.S., and end separation of apprehended illegal alien families – all while thwarting the president’s efforts to build a border wall, sick-Pulosi said: “In the Majority, Democrats will work to reverse the Republicans’ destructive anti-immigrant agenda. “Our House Democratic Majority will once again pass the Dream Act to end the uncertainty and fear inflicted on patriotic young men and women across the country. We will protect TPS [Temporary Protected Status] recipients and those fleeing unimaginable violence. And we will hold the Trump Administration accountable for their inhuman policy of separating families, and the trauma and anguish they have inflicted on vulnerable children and families at our border. “Of course, we will meet our responsibility to provide strong, smart border security that serves our country’s needs, is consistent with our values, and doesn’t squander billions of dollars on a border wall.”...
Without The Second Amendment, 
This Is What Would Happen In America
Nox_vq36PDA1zbc4z0kicB8xLiJ5swUr5S6eT1X-tJR3NWuy7CAoKYrRanNRUNm-nEgjliDI9SIDmkhUNePNgD5QOwBr6fSRqibzzCEghCCG4rvZPK0bwcsFx3MnnDblblDZe05OOrN_4-c=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?width=450
{thewashingtonstandard.com} ~ “And how we burned in the camps later, thinking...What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say goodbye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?… The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If…if…We didn’t love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation…. We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.” The above quote is from Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s Gulag Archipelago. Look at the words and read them carefully America. This one quote tells the tale of a disarmed, helpless population at the mercy of a brutal communist dictator that had a vision for a better world. In the final days, after years of simply going along and not understanding the implications of what was happening in their country, the Russian peasants trembling in fear, finally understood. Their time was up, there was no better world, only death. Solzhenitsyn says they didn’t love freedom enough and that they had no real awareness of the situation. What does he mean? Clearly, he means the Russian people had neglected their own responsibility to the society in which they lived. They lost any appreciation for what freedoms they may have had and believed the propaganda machine that fed them a continuous stream of lies about total equality and fairness. They believed their government when they were promised freedom from responsibility if they would just surrender their own free wills. In the end, the only equality there was the equality of dirt, squalor and the stench of rotting flesh...  https://thewashingtonstandard.com/without-the-second-amendment-this-is-what-would-happen-in-america/
.
fYhHLkJDI2yvon4s6zFOhNh8lx7PjKsKI1eHkOxgMDK9HASp-j1B4jJftdBsa0sJ4MWGUNqyxJbJTlfRo7kCbLWMXX-R2uk1rvb0zUIwWismElA8gtmBSL5w0puPIKdG2H6YfSsQnc87wgOiYqsTqY4icMU4kLYfRMiZl9GA6ro=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?width=150
.
scumbag/liar-nObamaCare Repeal Didn't Happen But...
D3HeEr0IYo5ONtAPAlVCh_7IHaixxKaJCmIkD-J8qrLwmMZyHz22WVdL1PZLzST0JLZDV1dmVcB-MG0a2KLR6pArzQZmNSdiWs5y7FgcFJ_VaCOsDQtOxc720X8l02ly83ZibOdxfQHctJLh2KSJ8BfjllePtLIAS-sB2xk=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?width=450
by Robin Smith:  One of the top issues of the 2018 midterm elections was health care. In the coming years, expect the divide over the issue to expand, not contract, due to activity by the courts and the Trump administration. scumbag/liar-nObamaCare wasn’t repealed as promised by Republicans, but the law is in intensive care with a prognosis that, to the government-control crowd, is grim.

             It’s important to note an important distinction in the discussion about health care: Health insurance doesn’t necessarily translate into low-cost health care.
               Democrats now demand single-payer health insurance that puts the government in charge of all care, all costs, all decision-making and, simply, placing every American on Medicare as their insurance. Republicans claim they want to reduce health care costs to increase access by driving down expenses through price transparency, market competition, and consumer control. Yet while having the White House and both chambers of Congress, all Republicans have managed is some deregulation from the Trump administration and effectively repealing the tax penalty for the individual mandate.
               Expected in the next few weeks is a decision in Texas v. Azar that will rule on the constitutionality of the individual mandate. Remember that Chief Justice John Roberts was the swing vote that determined the individual mandate could be enforced as a tax but could not be enforced as a mandate to purchase a product. In the convoluted thinking that Congress was prohibited from forcing Americans to purchase a service or good, Roberts, instead, decided Congress could constitutionally assign a tax for not purchasing said service or good.
               Republicans, as part of the tax reforms of 2017, left the tax mandate in the law but cut the penalty to zero. The argument in Texas v. Azar is that a tax of $0 is no tax at all, which undermines the constitutionality.
               Should the federal judge rule that the individual mandate is now unconstitutional, Democrats will launch into hysterics and Republicans are just as likely to join them in legislating a “fix” for the failed policy Dems created in 2010 without a single GOP vote.
               There’s a second factor that caused a Democrat head-explosion last week, and it will keep health care in the headlines. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) issued guidance to states to seek waivers to redefine how subsidies may be used for individuals qualifying for financial support to purchase insurance coverage that include the plans that don’t meet the minimum benefit standard for the bronze, silver, and gold plans of the “Affordable” Care Act exchanges. These exchange plans have been characteristic of extremely high premiums and deductibles with extensive coverage of care — some needed, some unneeded. For instance, a 45-year-old single male does not need to purchase a plan that features gynecological visits. Yet the ACA has a blanket policy for minimum benefits. Simpler, younger, healthier individuals are paying to subsidize the sick by purchasing too much care that they either don’t use or never benefit from a covered service because they fail to meet their deductible.
               These two current developments, in addition to the Trump administration’s efforts over the last two years to redirect some of the spending of scumbag/liar-nObamaCare to the control of the individual or the states, are guaranteed irritants of the socialized medicine crowd. Trump has worked to loosen the government control over health insurance by eliminating the employer mandate, rejecting cost-sharing subsidies (meant as a bailout of insurance companies that were sure to face unsustainable costs), and signing the executive order permitting insurers to sell cheaper catastrophic plans as well as plans to associations outside the federally regulated marketplace.
               Since scumbag/liar-nObamaCare repeal didn’t and won’t happen, the only hope to see the costs of health care reduced will be if the states act swiftly to seek these waivers issued through CMS to essentially block-grant monies that would’ve otherwise been controlled by federal mandates. States can, and should, in turn, find creative ways to establish their own health care markets that feature price transparency to engage patients in seeking the most cost-effective health services. States can also engage in using things like tiered copays to incentivize healthier behavior and choices.
               The American public consistently reports through polls and surveys that they want to see health care costs reduced. Don’t mistake that for health insurance coverage. The proof is in the Kaiser Family Foundation tracking poll released last week that showed of the 18-64-year-olds who qualify for scumbag/liar-nObamaCare subsidies and, under the current law, should purchase plans, four in 10 reported they were planning to forego coverage in 2019. Of the same population, only 24% were aware that the enrollment deadline for coverage is Dec. 15.
               Americans want access to reasonably priced health care services and medicine. Just as Americans who purchase a plan for their smartphone do so based on their personal needs, consumers would prefer to have insurance, in its most authentic sense, to cover catastrophic needs like trauma, surgery, and long-term care to avoid financial ruin, while paying a reasonable amount for regular check-ups, medicines, and procedures.
                    Will solutions come about the cost of health care? Yes, if states step up and operate as the laboratories our Founders intended by putting patients in charge of making decisions on their health care, seeing the prices, and paying the bills. Otherwise, be ready for $32 trillion for Medicare for all.  ~The Patriot Post  

https://patriotpost.us/articles/59795?mailing_id=3912&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.3912&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