TheFrontPageCover
~ Featuring ~
scumbag/liar-nObama's Iranian Cabal
Still Undermining Trump
Nate Jackson
.
House Democrats To Vote On Holding Barr,
Ross In Contempt Of Congress
by Henry Rodgers
{ dailycaller.com } ~ Attorney General William Barr and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross in contempt of Congress... The announcement comes as both Barr and Ross refuse to provide documents in regards to adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census. “Unfortunately, your actions are part of a pattern,” Maryland Democratic Rep. scumbag-Elijah Cummings, the chairman of the committee, wrote in different letters to Barr and Ross. “The Trump administration has been engaged in one of the most unprecedented cover-ups since Watergate, extending from the White House to multiple federal agencies and departments of the government and across numerous investigations.” “The Administration has been challenging Congress’ core authority to conduct oversight under the Constitution, questioning the legislative bases for congressional inquiries, objecting to committee rules and precedents that have been in place for decades under both Republican and Democratic leadership, and making baseless legal arguments to avoid producing documents and testimony,” scumbag-Cummings continued. This comes months after a second court ruled against adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census in March and accused Ross of breaking the law. The House Judiciary Committee also voted on May 8 to hold Barr in contempt of Congress for not giving the committee special counsel Robert Mueller’s full, unredacted report. In the letter, scumbag-Cummings said he would possibly delay the contempt votes if Barr and Ross give the committee the documents they asked for by Thursday, June 6. These dems are wrong and are idiots. https://dailycaller.com/2019/06/03/house-democrats-barr-contempt/?utm_medium=email .
John Huber and John Durham: The Forgotten
U.S. Attorneys Who May Bring the
Deep State Crashing Down
.
In Defense Of Lobbying
by David Harsanyi
{ thefederalist.com } ~ The media adores stories that bolster prevailing narratives about the virtuousness of “bipartisanship” and the nefariousness of money in politics... Last week, they got both when socialist commie-Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and conservative Ted Cruz displayed some populist synergy by promising to work on legislation that would ban former lawmakers from taking paid lobbyist positions. With the “ambitious bipartisan effort,” these two “seemingly opposite legislators” found “common ground” in their disapproval of former members of Congress “wielding their influence in new careers as government lobbyists,” read one particularly insufferable piece. Now, I don’t very much care for rent-seeking lobbyists, but I care even less for bipartisan attacks on the First Amendment, which have a long history of being as useless as they are unconstitutional. Lobbying exists. And producing laws that prohibit one class of Americans from pursuing an entirely legitimate and constitutionally protected vocation merely because they’ve been in public office—despite the disreputable nature of both jobs—should be unconstitutional. You don’t have to rake in the big bucks with the trial lawyers association to read the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” There’s no addendum in the founding document that says except for “bakers who refuse to design individual same-sex wedding cakes” or “those who give money anonymously” or “fossil-fuel influence-peddlers who help provide cheap, affordable energy” or “greedy former politicians who are cashing in with the lucrative abortion lobby.” Then again, banning former lawmakers from lobbying, whether for two years or forever, whether for pay or no pay, is little more than political posturing. There are fewer lobbyists in DC today than there have been in the past 20 years, even though lobbying groups spend more money promoting their causes than ever. Many former politicians are functional “lobbyists” who simply don’t register as such, yet still do virtually the same job. Which is to say, if you believe bans on speech will change the dynamic of politics, you’re incredibly naïve... https://thefederalist.com/2019/06/03/in-defense-of-lobbying/?utm_source=The+Federalist+List&utm_campaign=caf54e18f4-RSS_The_Federalist_Daily_Updates_w_Transom&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_cfcb868ceb-caf54e18f4-83771801 .
House Schedules First Hearing
On Mueller’s Findings
by Henry Rodgers
{thepoliticalinsider.com} ~ The House Judiciary Committee scheduled its first hearings focused on former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report into interference between Russia and the Trump campaign Monday... The committee, which is led by New York Democratic Rep. scumbag liar-Jerry Nadler, plans on interviewing those mentioned in the Mueller report to focus on “the most overt acts of obstruction.” The hearings are titled “Lessons from the Mueller Report: Presidential Obstruction and Other Crimes” and have been scheduled for June 10. “While the White House continues to cover up and stonewall, and to prevent the American people from knowing the truth, we will continue to move forward with our investigation,” scumbag liar-Nadler said in a statement. “These hearings will allow us to examine the findings laid out in Mueller’s report so that we can work to protect the rule of law and protect future elections through consideration of legislative and other remedies.”“Given the threat posed by the President’s alleged misconduct, our first hearing will focus on President Trump’s most overt acts of obstruction. In the coming weeks, other hearings will focus on other important aspects of the Mueller report,” he continued. Muller defended his report into the Trump campaign at a press conference, saying he found no collusion between Russia and the campaign, and that he would be “formally closing the special counsel’s office” and that he would be “resigning from the Department of Justice to return to private life.” Mueller also said that “there was insufficient evidence to charge a broader conspiracy,” and that the report would be his testimony if Congress issues a subpoena for him to testify, saying, “the report is my testimony.” Since Mueller resigned, it will be harder for Congress to get him to appear since he will be a private citizen....
Big Money for Big Government:
the MMT Debate Continues
by Jon N. Hall
{ americanthinker.com } ~ Are there any constraints on the power of the federal government to create money? Not the paper and metal money that we lug around in our pockets, but the digital money, the money that exists only as ones and zeros on the electronic storage devices of computers... the money that can be created merely by typing, are there any constraints on creating that kind of money? Of course, there’s the constraint one hopes of “common sense.” Surely the feds would never, say, create $328,993,000M so they could dole out a million bucks to every American for the sake of, you know, equality, fairness, or something. Even the proponents of Modern Monetary Theory, a.k.a. MMT, might balk at that. In October of 2018, American Thinker ran an article of mine that touched on MMT. Since then, AT has run two more that have dealt with MMT: an article in February by William Sullivan and an article in April by John Horvat. Elsewhere this year, there’s been quite a spate of articles dealing with MMT. The reason for the attention is surely the Democrats’ Big Plans for us, which will cost Big Money. But with MMT money is no object. According to the precepts of MMT, the sky’s the limit when it comes to the creation of new U.S. dollars. On March 8, the Washington Post ran George Will’s “The Democrats’ late-night pitch for 2020,” and it deals with MMT, “the Democrats’ intellectual breakthrough du jour.” Mr. Will is vexed that just about no one in D.C. takes the federal deficit seriously anymore. Even so, Will writes that “never in the long human story of intractable scarcities have there been days as happy as those that MMT promises.” On April 4, Vox ran “Modern Monetary Theory, explained” by Dylan Matthews, the blurb for which is: “A very detailed walk through of the big new left economic idea.” To give you an idea of how far left Matthews is, he describes commie-Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’ embrace of MMT as “the most vocal mainstream support MMT had gotten.” One man’s “mainstream” is another man’s socialist slough. The article is rather long, but conservatives might read it just to get a bead on how the opposition thinks. So why, then, does the government tax, under the MMT view? Two big reasons: One, taxation gets people in the country to use the government-issued currency. Because they have to pay income taxes in dollars, Americans have a reason to earn dollars, spend dollars, and otherwise use dollars as opposed to, say, bitcoins or euros. Second, taxes are one tool governments can use to control inflation. They take money out of the economy, which keeps people from bidding up prices...
.
scumbag/liar-nObama's Iranian Cabal Still
Undermining Trump
Nate Jackson: More than two years into Donald Trump’s presidency, Barack scumbag/liar-nObama and his minions are still working on ways to protect the former president’s legacy. One aspect of that effort has been the reportedly ongoing efforts of former scumbag/liar-nObama officials to undermine Trump’s policy toward Iran.
The Daily Beast reports on the efforts to stop Trump’s “scorched-earth campaign” against Tehran, which includes briefing congressional Democrats:
As the Trump administration sent warplanes and an aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf, a small group of former scumbag/liar-nObama administration officials reached out to their contacts in the Iranian government, including Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif. Their message to Iran: Don’t take Trump’s bait. Stay calm.
Conversations between former scumbag/liar-nObama officials and Iranian government officials have been ongoing since November 2016. Zarif, who visits the U.S. every year for the U.N. General Assembly in New York, usually meets with lawmakers, think tanks, journalists, and former officials when he is in town.
While The Daily Beast doesn’t name the three officials, the cabal is likely to include at least Ben Rhodes, who confessed to pushing a deceptive narrative on the Iran nuclear deal so as to create a media “echo chamber” to sway public opinion. He explained that seemingly independent experts “were saying things that validated what we had given them to say.”
Another possible scumbag/liar-nObama official talking to Iran is hanoi-John Kerry, the former secretary of state who crafted the Iran deal. hanoi-Kerry admitted last year to meeting with Zarif “three or four times” since leaving office, and he’s clearly just as invested as scumbag/liar-nObama is in saving his own legacy. If hanoi-Kerry isn’t among the three officials in the Beast’s story, he still looms behind the scenes.
In any case, hanoi-Kerry has a history of imposing himself into foreign affairs and undermining U.S. negotiations, starting with his meetings with the North Vietnamese in Paris in 1971, when he was still a military officer, as the United States was attempting to negotiate an end to the Vietnam War. Put another way, hanoi-Kerry has a long history of aiding and abetting American enemies, and he should have been charged with treason nearly 50 years ago.
It was just last month that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo specifically rebuked hanoi-Kerry, saying, “It is ahistorical and completely unhelpful when previous secretaries of state are continuing to engage in the tasks that they engaged in when they were the secretary of state. I’ll leave it at that in the sense of it’s time to get off the stage for the previous administration. I understand they have different views than we have; they are entitled to those views. But talking with senior leaders around the world and suggesting to them somehow that waiting out this administration is the best course of action for those countries is something that is unheard of. It is fundamentally different than any previous administration has undertaken, and they ought to leave the foreign policy to us.”
~The Patriot Post
Comments