TheFrontPageCover
~ Featuring ~
scumbag/liar-Schiff Show' Roundup
Vindman Linked to Whistleblower
Thomas Gallatin
.
Despite scumbag/liar-Schiff’s claims,
whistleblower has no 'statutory
right' to anonymity
by Jerry Dunleavy
{ washingtonexaminer.com } ~ Rep. scumbag/liar-Adam Schiff has repeatedly stated in impeachment hearings in front of the House Intelligence Committee that the Ukraine whistleblower has “a statutory right to anonymity” and blocked Republican questions about him... The problem, many legal experts say, is that the committee chairman, a California Democrat, is wrong — no specific legal requirement to shield the whistleblower’s identity from the public exists. The Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act establishes rules for whistleblowers to report on waste, fraud, abuse, and corruption in a lawful manner, and it, along with presidential directives, provides legal protections against reprisals and punishment. Anonymity, however, is not one of those guarantees. “There is no language in the statute as written — or amended — that gives a whistleblower from the intelligence community the statutory right to anonymity,” Cully Stimson, a former Pentagon official and the head of the Heritage Foundation’s National Security Law Program, told the Washington Examiner. "That’s separate and distinct from whether Congress wants to make the decision to not provide the name — that’s at the discretion of the chairman.” Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson, who received the whistleblower’s complaint in August, has said he must keep the whistleblower’s name secret, but it does not appear this legal prohibition extends to President Trump, his allies, or anyone else. Atkinson said his review of the whistleblower's allegations related to a July 25 call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky "identified some indicia of bias of an arguable political bias on the part of the complainant in favor of a rival political candidate." He wrote, “Such evidence did not change my determination that the complaint relating to the urgent concern appears credible."Arthur Rizer, a former Army officer and DOJ prosecutor who leads the R Street Institute’s criminal justice team, said he doubts the law guarantees whistleblower anonymity. “I am pretty sure on its plain reading only the individual who receives the complaint has a ‘statutory obligation’ to keep anonymity — and, I think, even then, there are circumstances where the veil of anonymity can be pierced,” Rizer told the Washington Examiner. “So, as a starting point, the chairman’s comment is vague and overbroad — and legally speaking, that makes him wrong.” There are, however, laws against witness intimidation that could apply if the whistleblower was outed....
Ratcliffe flips script on Dems, reveals
only bribery reference was about
loose lips liar-Biden, not Trump
By C. Douglas Golden
{ wnd.com } ~ It's a telling thing that the most successful hearings the Democrats have held during the Trump administration thus far have taken place behind closed doors... If you can control who testified, what questions get asked and what information gets released, things seem to work out swimmingly. You can't do that when the hearings are public, however, no matter how few people are watching. The scumbag-Comey hearing was a disaster. The Mueller hearing was even worse because at least scumbag-Comey didn't seem like he was the victim of mentally diminishing returns. And while the Trump impeachment inquiry hearings have just begun, let's face some facts: The way this is going, the streak is intact. "Opening Day of the impeachment hearings hardly hit blockbuster status, generating middling viewer interest compared with other Trump-era political hearings," Neil Rothschild and Sara Fischer wrote for Axios. Michael Goodwin from the New York Post was more critical: "Tuesday wasn’t much help. As they did in the first hearings last week, Dems again failed to make the Ukraine issue the crime of the century or even of the Trump presidency. Their hyperbolic descriptions are not even close to the pedestrian evidence they’re producing." It's a bit worse than that. Not only are the Democrats missing, but the Republicans are hitting. Take Rep. John Ratcliffe of Texas, who turned the bribery charges the Democrats have been trying to hit Donald Trump with around and noted that the only bribery reference in testimony was about former Vice President loose lips ;liar-Joe Biden. Bribery, as Ratcliffe noted, is the new Democrat go-to -- something that I'm sure has nothing to do with recent polling that shows "bribery" elicits more of a reaction than "quid pro quo" with voters. "In a press conference last Thursday, speaker of the House, liar-Nancy Pelosi said that President Trump committed the impeachable offense of bribery evidenced in his July 25th call transcript with President Zelensky," the Texas representative said while questioning National Security Council member Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman and Jennifer Williams, an aide of Vice President Pence's who heard the call. "In concert with that, multiple Democratic members of this committee gave TV and radio interviews over this past week discussing how the president’s conduct supported his impeachment for committing bribery. "All of which struck me as very odd because, for the longest time, this was all about quid pro quo according to the whistleblower complaint. But after witness after witness began saying there was no quid pro quo, or even that quid pro quo was not even possible, we saw a shift from the Democrats. They briefly started to refer to the president’s conduct on the July 25th call as extortion. And now it’s shifted again last week to bribery." "Ms. Williams, you used the word 'unusual' to describe the president’s call on July 25th," he continued... https://www.wnd.com/2019/11/rep-ratcliffe-flips-script-dems-reveals-bribery-reference-testimony-biden-not-trump/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=wnd-brief&utm_campaign=dailypm&utm_content=brief .
Gordon Sondland’s ‘Bombshell’
Impeachment Testimony Was A Dud
By Tristan Justice
{ thefederalist.com } ~ It was the testimony that was supposed to bring an end to the Trump administration as we knew it, finally completing Democrats’ three-year mission to undo the results of the 2016 presidential election... Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland testified Wednesday that President Donald Trump criminally leveraged the power of the Oval Office to pressure a foreign entity to investigate political opponents at home by tying military aid and a White House meeting with the Ukrainian president to an investigation into the loose lips liar-Biden family in a quid pro quo. “I know that members of this committee have frequently framed these complicated issues in the form of a simple question: was there a ‘quid pro quo’? As I testified previously, with regard to the requested White House call and White House meeting, the answer is yes,” Sondland declared in his opening statement, affirming the Democrats’ latest conspiracy theory seeking the removal of the president. At first glance, it was a day of damning testimony for the president, and the media ran wild with headlines spelling out Armageddon for the Trump White House. “Sondland Delivers for Democrats With Bombshell Testimony,” reads a headline in U.S. News and World Report. “Sondland’s bombshell testimony blows holes in Trump’s Ukraine defence,” reads another in The Guardian. “Sondland’s bombshell testimony leaves Trump’s Republican allies scrambling,” declares the Washington Post. The “bombshell testimony” Sondland offered, however, failed to explode anything on the Trump administration. Sondland, who has already changed his testimony multiple times since sitting down behind closed doors for a private deposition, admitted to lawmakers Wednesday that his accusations of a clear quid pro quo were based entirely on assumptions about Trump and the president’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani. “Mr. Sondland, let’s be clear: no one on this planet—not Donald Trump, Rudy Guiliani, Mick Mulvaney, Mike Pompeo—no one told you aid was tied to political investigations, is that correct?” Republican Rep. Mike Turner of Ohio asked. “That’s correct,” Sondland said... https://thefederalist.com/2019/11/21/gordon-sondlands-bombshell-impeachment-testimony-was-a-dud/?utm_source=The+Federalist+List&utm_campaign=0c666140b4-RSS_The_Federalist_Daily_Updates_w_Transom&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_cfcb868ceb-0c666140b4-83771801 .
Jim Jordan Blasts liar-Pelosi for
Calling President Trump an ‘Impostor’
by HANNAH BLEAU
{ breitbart.com } ~ Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) used a portion of his time during Tuesday’s public impeachment hearing before the House Intelligence Committee to remind the American people that Democrats have been hellbent on impeaching President Trump... since the day he took office and slammed House Speaker liar-Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) for calling the duly elected president an “impostor.” Jordan used a portion of his time to demonstrate the Democrats’ continued efforts to oust Trump and specifically blasted liar-Pelosi for describing Trump as an “impostor” during her appearance on Face the Nation over the weekend. “What the president, and perhaps some at the White House have to know, that the words of the president weigh a ton. They are very significant, and he should not frivolously throw out insults, but that’s what he does,” liar-Pelosi said, attributing Trump’s words to “his own insecurity as an impostor.” “I think he knows full well that he’s in that office way over his head,” she added. “And so, he has to diminish everyone else.” “Sunday, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives called the President of the United States an impostor. The Speaker of the House called the president an impostor,” Jordan stressed. “Sixty-three million people voted for the guy who won an Electoral College landslide – the speaker calls an impostor. That’s what’s happened to our country, to this Congress,” Jordan continued. “The speaker’s statement says it all.” He continued, noting that Democrats “have never accepted the will of the American people” and “don’t trust the American people” who “wanted to send someone to this town who was willing to shake it up a bit.” “They don’t trust that. And they have tried to do everything they can to undo what the American people decided on November 8, 2016,” he continued. “They’ve been out to get the president since the day he was elected,” he added, noting that five Democrat members of the House Intelligence Committee “voted to move forward with impeachment before the phone call ever happened.” He stated: The whistleblower’s lawyer, the whistleblower’s legal team said this, January 30, 2017. The president has been in office about a week. ‘Coup has started. First of many steps.’ Next sentence. ‘Impeachment will follow ultimately.’ I guess we’re in the final step. It started 3 and a half years ago. Congresswoman worthless-Tlaib starts this Congress, first day of Congress said impeach the president. Representative scumbag-Green said if we don’t impeach him, the president’s going to win reelection. We got to do it. Most importantly, most importantly, five Democrat members of this committee voted to move forward with impeachment before the phone call ever happened. The truth is, the attacks actually started before– before the inauguration, even before the election. The ranking member talked about this. His opening statement, July 2016. FBI opens an investigation into so-called Trump-Russia coordination, collusion which was never there....
When the villain is scumbag/liar-nObama,
not Trump, news suddenly becomes
not worth reporting
By Kyle Smith
{ nypost.com } ~ So the United States has “the world’s highest rate of children in detention.” Is this worth reporting? Maybe, maybe not. Nevertheless, Agence France-Presse, or AFP, and Reuters did report it... attributing the information to a “United Nations study” on migrant children detained at the US-Mexico border. Then the two agencies retracted the story. Deleted, withdrew, demolished. If they could have used one of those Men in Black memory-zappers on us, they would have. Sheepishly, the two news organizations explained that, you see, the UN data was from 2015 — part of a border crackdown that had begun years earlier. We all know who the president was in 2015. It wasn’t evil, child-caging monster President Trump. It was that nice, compassionate, child-caging monster President Barack scumbag/liar-nObama. Zap. The story made scumbag/liar-nObama look bad. Hence the story was removed. Not updated or corrected, removed. I know it’s a heavy news environment. Who can keep up? But try to remember this one, because it’s instructive. People think news organizations flat-out fabricate stories. That isn’t often the case. Fake news is a problem that pops up here and there, but the much more systematic and deeply entrenched attack on truth is the casual, everyday bias of reporters. AFP and Reuters deleted a story that was, in a narrow sense, true — that a UN study claimed the United States had some 100,000 children in migrant-related detention. The United Nations is horribly biased against America and the West. Still, on the level of lazy, news-release-driven journalism, the locked-up-kids story was minimally valid... https://nypost.com/2019/11/20/when-the-villain-is-obama-not-trump-news-suddenly-becomes-not-worth-reporting/ .
The Democrat Debate Drones
by MELISSA MACKENZIE
{ spectator.org } ~ Your fearless debate correspondent here, to tell you that once again, you missed nothing. And by nothing, I mean an empty, cavernous, negative space of dark matter where all intelligence, vitality, and humanity gets sucked into an endless void... You are smarter for missing this misery. Who are these Democrats trying to appeal to? Who is the constituency for their insanity? I really want to know. These are not serious people. It might be that they’re not people at all, just 10 robots put on a stage and talking word salad as placeholders. None of them act like they can beat Trump. Do they even want to? Once again, let’s go candidate by candidate and discuss who the constituency is for each one. loose lips liar-Biden: Old people with memory issues. The Boomers are, once again, marauding through America and leaving destruction in their paths. loose lips liar-Biden is their standard-bearer. He had a great moment where he said, with sincerity and urgency, that the country needed to come together he’s full of ca-ca, but it was a good moment. That was undone with his talk about punching out those who hurt women and his talk about his blackness. dinky/liar-Warren: Wonks and the media. dinky/liar-Warren’s plans have plans. The only plan that’s missing: how to get elected. This hyperactive hip grandma is still 1) a grandma and 2) crazy. Her plans are nuts. Tonight she shared a plan for the government to build 2.7 million homes. Don’t forget the free health care! Don’t forget the two pennies that rich people will pay. If anyone listening to her believes a word out of her old-lady mouth and then votes for her, they’re dumber than the media. Buttigieg: Iowans. The fact that Iowans like this guy just proves once and for all that Iowa is the worst state in the union. He’s got the aw-shucks Midwestern thing down. He looks like Opie. He’s got the trifecta of being a perfect Iowa candidate: weird, false-folksy, veteran, far-left loon. Oops, that’s four things. He hits a brick wall in South Carolina. Thank God. Those were the front-runners. Lord, have mercy. Okay, continuing on. commie-Sanders: Communists and young people, but I repeat myself. Since commie-Bernie’s heart thing, he’s actually let go of his angry commie-Bernie persona, and he’s better for it. Still, he’s a straight-up commie. He had a funny moment, so there’s that. Klobuchar: Minnesotans. I don’t know why. lowlife-Harris: lowlife-Kamala Harris. There’s one thing that lowlife-Kamala Harris knows, and it’s that lowlife-Kamala Harris is great. She’s smart. She’s tough. She claims to love justice. Pretty sure she focus-grouped the word because she said it every other word. lowlife-Kamala Harris is sure to get one vote. Her own. Yang: Smart people. Since there are no smart Democrats, Yang is suffering in the polls. On the other hand, he’s having a blast. He’s personable, funny, likable, and makes sense sometimes. He’s still a Democrat, which means that his ideas are mostly crazy, but he’s the only candidate who noted it’s better for children to be with parents, and we should encourage that, so props for that. He has charisma. He really should be in politics — maybe run for senator against lowlife-Kamala Harris. It’s a miracle she got elected the first time....
.
scumbag/liar-Schiff Show' Roundup: Vindman
Linked to Whistleblower
Thomas Gallatin: Four witnesses were called to testify Tuesday in the Democrats’ long-running impeachment gambit. Two of the witnesses, U.S. Army Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman and Jennifer Williams, special advisor to Vice President Mike Pence on Europe and Russia, are the first witnesses to actually have any firsthand knowledge of President Donald Trump’s July 25 phone call to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Both Vindman and Williams listened in on the call.
Each witness testified that there was no bribery or quid pro quo present in the phone call, while at the same time both described Trump’s request of Zelensky to investigate the loose lips liar-Bidens’ connection to Burisma as “inappropriate.” On the issue of the Democrats’ new semantic choice of the word “bribery,” no evidence was present to substantiate such an allegation.
There was new information that was learned, however. Under Ohio Republican Rep. Jim Jordan’s pointed questioning, it became clear that Vindman is the one who leaked to the whistleblower. As Jordan honed in on the individuals with whom Vindman admitted discussing the president’s phone call, only one individual, an intelligence officer, remained unnamed. In fact, Chairman scumbag/liar-Adam Schiff (D-CA) jumped in to interrupt Jordan’s questioning in order to forbid the individual’s name from being mentioned. scumbag/liar-Schiff’s action only further demonstrated that he has been lying about not knowing the identity of the whistleblower.
As for Vindman, it became clear that he allowed his own political views to direct his actions rather than follow the well-established chain of command. His testimony prompted a stinging response from Benghazi hero Mark Geist, who stated, “Vindman is a disgrace to all who have served. [In the] transcript of his previous closed door testimony he clearly admits to undermining the POTUS foreign policy and now he has chairman Schiff advising him on how to answer questions.” Navy Seal Robert O'Neill, the one who killed Osama bin Laden, seconded Geist, writing, “I agree. I wish the left wouldn’t use his uniform to make him a saint. He’s an operative with an agenda.”
Mark Alexander wonders whether Vindman “is part of the deep-state cabal” endeavoring to undermine Trump.
Kurt Volker, former special envoy to Ukraine, and Timothy Morrison, deputy assistant to the president and the National Security Council’s senior director for Europe and Russia, were the other two witnesses to testify. Their testimonies only further demonstrated the fact that Democrats continue to lack evidence to support their charge that Trump engaged in an impeachable offense — let alone anything even remotely criminal. Volker, however, did throw shade at Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, asserting, “President Trump had a deeply rooted, negative view of Ukraine rooted in the past. He was receiving other information from other individuals, including Mayor Giuliani, that was more negative, causing him to retain this negative view.” So, again, that’s a policy dispute, not fodder for impeachment. ~The Patriot Post
VIDEO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33YLnToDp5U&feature=emb_title
Comments