Monday AM ~ TheFrontPageCover

UEHenblg6XnN3CsRjFhVTIUAjr2Iu6-6XXydqd5H_r1W9Fhn6pP_DGHoWZAbZEUNY8J4Ghsnbw1cS7VdtY8iwlmmL7OOHUVZZgPCnx-1TbjBKawopBRMEWVTTjfPR88QqrD6-mMbxeIM6QroEEG_gTsnRn23VYSgA6bA_o88hUTnv1EYanOI5FBRLKjmNIDTOhl52scDwCubHY9DHlaPMdPdKdMjZ8Q3Pw=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710x
TheFrontPageCover
~ Featuring ~
The Deal of the Century
AX7E-R2UbdvckzDHiXztJ0PrsBebykPkX60JtYcR_I4608MD076l3V9DM56LXG126QqiqyjwJU4uLeHIHNWELSuFmJDr00xxfT1wi2BFE5pmvYMjSPdiSp0pm81qJSNJCuQoXzac3cPEsCeA3dLfufo3Acxlxes=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=  Gary Bauer
AGHnzvDgAIc_dkrUO59jF21LrUmiQ79dA3RIshU-YlAdfSFPOhc54BmJs1OTRtvnrEX-cCbeiMVXdurlydL03p7YzXsWg_6cAavWTIOYU1PogQU4ftAjtXM=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
.
Dems unveil 2020 campaign message 
Trump not acquitted
E9jehzejH5ztowbyq188qwkwQdf1P6-f8gOuUmdHBnthmN2kFDiPsrH0IasVnJyMxBFo-qaXp1Mcf7wlo3FpT0fbgl_CvJuBcrEDzO_u9e10LoEZ1h1elhsFHiX7mFr8J9Po-jR-iwyfEQ=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710x
by wnd.com ~ Democrats already are honing their message for the 2020 campaign, insisting that the Senate Republicans' decision not to allow further witnesses or documents in the impeachment trial... of Donald Trump means the president's inevitable acquittal next week won't be valid.  Senate Minority Leader Chuck scumbag-Schumer of New York told reporters Friday "the acquittal will have no value, because Americans will know that this trial was not a real trial." Lead House impeachment manager Rep. scumbag/liar-Adam Schiff, D-Calif., told senators, "You cannot have a true acquittal if you've not had a fair trial." Impeachment manager Rep. Sylvia Garcia, D-Texas, said "an acquittal on an incomplete record after a trial lacking witnesses and evidence will be no exoneration."At her weekly news conference Thursday, House Speaker liar-Nancy Pelosi said Trump "cannot be acquitted" if the trial lacks witness testimony and documentation. She added that Trump's impeachment defense team "disgraced themselves" and should be disbarred. With a 51 to 49 vote Friday evening, Republicans voted down Democrats' effort to hear the testimony of witnesses such as acting White House Chief of State Mick Mulvaney and former National Security Adviser John Bolton. The White House defense team argued that Democrats had 17 witnesses during the House investigation, and video clips from that testimony were used in the Senate trial. They further contend that the articles presented by the Democrats are not impeachable offenses, meaning any further testimony is unnecessary. Trump is expected to be acquitted next week, possibly on Wednesday, after final arguments are heard and the senators are given an opportunity to speak. Several Democrats are expected to join the 53 Republicans in voting to acquit the president. Removal from office would require a supermajority of 67 votes on either of the two articles of impeachment. The trial will resume Monday... These lying dems had their chance in the House to call witness and they didn't do it. Now they are crying about acquittal.  https://www.wnd.com/2020/01/dems-unveil-2020-campaign-message-trump-not-acquitted/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=wnd-breaking&utm_campaign=breaking&utm_content=breaking  
.
China: Video Out Of Wuhan Hospital Shows 
The Truth Of The Coronavirus’ Horrifying Effects
dee0HNKVIoBcqBX7GoSkUoQ8tFk8LCUTvIsche5u1v6EoWhFzxQx1mRXA6WrvtTm-DuNTvQ2AdDyhFsHDr9rZHG6j7d-CDsrF7A7RE88Hc1wZaIgtyiDbQ=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710x
by Tim Brown
{ thewashingtonstandard.com } ~ As news continues to come out of China regarding the Coronavirus and whether it is a real threat to the population or not... and whether the Communist government there can actually contain it, a new video has surfaced from inside a Wuhan Hospital that shows just what is going on inside. The video was posted at Live Links just hours ago. Frankly, this looks like a tremendous amount of people are literally having seizures. Are we being told the truth about this? Is it really a virus or some sort of neurotoxin? We’ve also been providing our own reporting on this issue. The truth about the coronavirus is simply not being told the American people.   https://thewashingtonstandard.com/china-video-out-of-wuhan-hospital-shows-the-truth-of-the-coronavirus-horrifying-effects/  
.
'Certainly will be a standout': John Durham 
appoints new criminal chief
QuXYiUxuEoBsOGC_aY5aaAfAz_2h9staPD-DwqDTFTeFg5lmurUkq90GxSypXVbwS5hi9WylNPUQexOPjX8ENSG2ShpU7IcjVmPD3h_KtSQflZeBpbgddkXfl1LBwPkF0UWHAw=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710x
by Daniel Chaitin
{ washingtonexaminer.com } ~ The federal prosecutor in charge of the Justice Department inquiry into the origins of the Russia investigation appointed a new criminal division chief... John Durham, a U.S. attorney from Connecticut, announced on Monday that the role will be taken by Sarah Karwan, who has prosecuted a wide variety of criminal cases. “I am thrilled that Sarah Karwan will lead our criminal division,” Durham said in a statement. “During her more than 12 years as an assistant U.S. attorney, Sarah has done it all, prosecuting violent criminals, drug traffickers, financial fraudsters, corrupt public officials, and a wide variety of other wrongdoers. Given the breadth of her experience and her exceptional lawyering skills, she certainly will be a standout as our new criminal chief.” Karwan replaced William Nardini, who now has a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit. She graduated from the College of William and Mary in 1997 and from the University of Connecticut School of Law in 2000. Before joining the U.S. Attorney’s Office in 2007, she spent roughly six years in the private sector specializing in securities litigation. As head of the criminal division, Karwan will oversee the violent crimes and narcotics, financial fraud and public corruption, national security and cybercrime, and major crimes program-based units. Durham has been tasked by Attorney General William Barr with conducting a review of the FBI's Russia investigation. In October, it was reported that Durham was expanding the scope of his investigation, adding agents and resources, to examine the post-election timeline up to the appointment of Robert Mueller as special counsel in May 2017. The "investigation into the investigators" was reported to be upgraded to a criminal inquiry later that month, which gives Durham the power to impanel a grand jury and hand down indictments. Durham's team is exploring whether a crime was committed by Kevin Clinesmith, a former FBI lawyer who was found by the Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz to have altered a document during the FBI's efforts to obtain a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant renewal to continue wiretapping onetime Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.   https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/certainly-will-be-a-standout-john-durham-appoints-new-criminal-chief   
How Virginia Became the Frontline
 in the Fight Over Guns
JZq78POU1_0-jFoW4QbcY9shZ6lhSNyvFFlj2zI7og2xhH869wC7RqbxAv2HbZ89Y7cQ2_tiVkEoUUQEycoUi0Jf8Azn0EJT_xDD32vHPnptlPO84NLUn5AKjO1hgfnpifnKkuzsbFZzPX-MHyol=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710x
By Stephen Gutowski
{ freebeacon.com } ~ Virginia became the center of the gun-control debate years before tens of thousands of gun-rights supporters amassed on the steps of the state capitol earlier this month... Gun-control activists targeted Virginia as a potential foothold in the American South as far back as 2013. The once-reliably conservative state has seen its population center shift to the Northern Virginia suburbs and university towns—developments that led to Mark Warner's gubernatorial victory in 2002 and Barack scumbag/liar-nObama's wins in the state in 2008 and 2012. During that time, however, Republican control of the state legislature blocked gun regulations and Virginia's state-level deliberative bodies became a focus of left-leaning gun-control groups. Starting in 2013 and ramping up two years later, Moms Demand Action and Everytown for Gun Safety, with substantial funding from 2020 presidential candidate Mike Bloomberg, flooded the state with millions of dollars. Democratic groups poured a record $13 million into the state's elections last year. Bloomberg-backed groups along outspent the National Rifle Association by an 8-1 margin, helping Democrats capture narrow majorities in both the House of Delegates and the General Assembly. The controversies that have erupted across the state since then come as the members of the newly ascendant Democratic majority find themselves caught between the campaign donors who helped them secure control in Richmond and local residents angered by the gun-control proposals offered by those groups and the Democrats they backed. Those proposals include an outright ban on AR-15s, which elicited an intense backlash. The outcome of the struggle will have an impact beyond the immediate struggles in the state that will determine the shape of a universal background check or "red flag" law in Virginia. It may well shape the gun debate nationwide for years to come...
.
Democrats’ History Of Intimidating SCOTUS 
Justices Carries Over Into Impeachment
aeSA7WxJlch002P44yTc-iSOgsS2oi6MVDhVHCJ6-hLSyqoD2mhTb6wOJ0PZJY83lHmdgE5LG5cbHrKlU3qXnTOdV8iYR1m5eEo3csjTZhp5iko5yvCCMYGGtP9k1Q=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710x
By Erielle Davidson
{ thefederalist.com } ~ Chief Justice John Roberts’ expression was priceless after reading Sen. Elizabeth dinky/liar-Warren’s garish question during the Senate impeachment trial Thursday night, a question which lacked any remote sense of self awareness... The inquiry facetiously read, “At a time when large majorities of Americans have lost faith in government, does the fact that the Chief Justice is presiding over an impeachment trial in which Republican senators have thus far refused to allow witnesses or evidence contribute to the loss of legitimacy of the chief justice, the Supreme Court, and the Constitution?” The purpose of the question was stunningly obvious. It was to suggest that the only way Chief Justice John Roberts could remotely hold onto any semblance of legitimacy was to ensure the outcome favored by the Democrats came to fruition, an outcome which, given the increasingly likely failed motion, would require Chief Justice Roberts to interfere in a manner that is not explicitly written into the Constitution. As a seasoned lawyer, she knew precisely the type of question she was asking. One that reached to a sore spot for the Supreme Court and one over which they have continued to opine. The question of how much of a role public faith in the federal judiciary should play in judicial decision-making has been a topic hotly contested. It was scrutinized heavily when it reared its ugly head in Justice O’Connor’s opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, when it appeared alongside a menagerie of other factors that may be considered in the process of determining whether to overrule precedent. It wasn’t regarded as wholly dispositive, and it’s debatable whether it should be considered at all. With Sen. rino-Lisa Murkowski likely voting no on the Democrats’ motion to allow witnesses, there’s little risk of a tie any longer, meaning Roberts is thankfully off the hook – at least for now. But when it comes to Roberts’ role in “breaking a tie,” should there be one in the trial, the language of Article I, Section III of the Constitution does not make it clear whether the Chief Justice is permitted to vote. Yet, the undercurrent of dinky/liar-Warren’s question suggested that his involvement was somehow critical for the sanctity of SCOTUS’ reputation. It’s utter nonsense, but it is perfectly on-brand for the Democrats since President Trump’s election in 2016. She’s threatening to use the weight of the Democratic Party to conduct warfare on his reputation. We all know the playbook...
.
Sweden: Hijab is 'Look of the Year'
_qZ3IlGUtj3gLzgNpqLE-IPLwXqjAX40vSsPo02h5lnHz3UZS_7W8min47S0a6Kaiwhr0NDIlSf7hCiEzpTmclQJ-A=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=?profile=RESIZE_710x
by Judith Bergman
{ gatestoneinstitute.org } ~ On January 20, Iran's only female Olympic medalist, Kimia Alizadeh, defected from Iran. "I am one of the millions of oppressed women in Iran whom they've been playing for years," she wrote... Then, last month, the Islamic Republic's female chess master, Mitra Hejazipour, 27, removed her hijab during a chess tournament in Moscow and was promptly  removed from the national chess team. Hejazipour said that she had decided "not to have a share in this horrendous lie and not to play the game of 'We love the hijab and have no problem with it' anymore..." "It creates many limitations for women and deprives them of their basic rights. Is this protection? I say definitely not, it is solely and merely a limitation." For years, women in Iran have been arrested and imprisoned for refusing to wear the mandatory headscarf and even for protesting its use. Between January 2018 and August 2019, at least 12 people were given prison sentences ranging from six months to 33 years for publicly removing their headscarves and other public acts of civil disobedience against compulsory hijab and 32 people were arrested for such acts, according to Center for Human Rights in Iran (CHRI). According to the website: "Millions of women who do not conform to the state's dictates regarding mandatory dress codes are stopped by the police each year for 'improper hijab,' and tens of thousands are referred to the judiciary in court cases each year... hijab protestors are... typically prosecuted under charges related to 'morality,' such as 'encouraging people to corruption and prostitution...'". "The Iranian authorities are employing the full machinery of the state to crush opposition to forced hijab, but with more than half the population against it, the tide is increasingly against them," said CHRI's Executive Director Hadi Ghaemi. As women in Iran protested the regime and the mandatory hijab, women in Sweden -- who are represented by "the first feminist government in the world" -- were championing the hijab on several recent occasions, illustrating the curious cultural transformations there...   https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15509/sweden-hijab   
AGHnzvDgAIc_dkrUO59jF21LrUmiQ79dA3RIshU-YlAdfSFPOhc54BmJs1OTRtvnrEX-cCbeiMVXdurlydL03p7YzXsWg_6cAavWTIOYU1PogQU4ftAjtXM=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
.
The Deal of the Century
AX7E-R2UbdvckzDHiXztJ0PrsBebykPkX60JtYcR_I4608MD076l3V9DM56LXG126QqiqyjwJU4uLeHIHNWELSuFmJDr00xxfT1wi2BFE5pmvYMjSPdiSp0pm81qJSNJCuQoXzac3cPEsCeA3dLfufo3Acxlxes=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href= Gary Bauer
 

I just returned from a historic event in the East Room of the White House where President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced a new peace plan. 

The room was electric, filled with Christian and Jewish leaders, as well as key administration officials who worked on the plan, including Jared Kushner, Jason Greenblatt, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, and Ambassador David Friedman. 

There were also several ambassadors from Arab nations in the audience, a hopeful sign that others in the region are eager to work with Israel and the United States to advance peace in the Middle East.

The president received more than a dozen standing ovations, and Prime Minister Netanyahu received nearly as many as they outlined their vision for lasting peace. This is not a “pie in the sky” deal. Nor does it force Israel to do anything that will hurt its security. Here are some of the key elements of the Trump plan:

  • Jerusalem remains the undivided capital of Israel. This is essential from Israel’s stand point, and something that Pastor John Hagee of Christians United for Israel and I worked very hard to guarantee.

  • The Palestinians must recognize Israel as the Jewish state.

  • Hamas must be disarmed, and the Palestinians must reject terrorism.

  • The so-called “refugee problem” will be settled outside the boundaries of Israel.

  • Israel will suspend construction in disputed territories for four years to give both sides time to implement various aspects of the deal.

  • The president pledged $50 billion of investment to provide hope and economic opportunity to the Palestinian people.

Trump spoke directly to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, saying, “If you choose the path of peace, America will be there to help you every step of the way.”

Netanyahu praised Trump as “the greatest friend that Israel has ever had in the White House.” He hailed the Trump peace plan as “a realistic path to a durable peace,” that recognizes Israel’s sovereignty over Jerusalem, the Jordan Valley, and other strategic areas of Judea and Samaria. 

The prime minister vowed, “If the Palestinians are genuinely prepared to make peace with the Jewish state … Israel will be prepared to negotiate peace right away." 

The Real Problem

Almost every American president and Israeli prime minister has tried and failed to negotiate a lasting peace between Israelis and the Palestinians. The problem is not Israel or the United States. 

The real obstacle to peace is the refusal of the Palestinian Authority, Hamas, Hezbollah, and others to recognize the right of Israel to exist at all. Their so-called "leaders” have rejected every peace deal ever offered to them. They have to want peace with Israel.

As I noted above, President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu expressed the hope that the Palestinian leadership would not be stupid and reject this deal out of hand. Unfortunately, Mahmoud Abbas has already done just that.

Another major problem is that the Palestinian people are themselves divided between Abbas and his Fatah Party in the West Bank and Hamas, which rules Gaza. It’s not at all clear who speaks for the Palestinian people. 

The 84-year-old Abbas is now in the 15th year of his four-year term of office and is expected to step down sometime this year. Polls show that Hamas, a terrorist organization funded by Iran and dedicated to Israel’s destruction, could easily prevail in a new election. 

How do you compromise with an opponent who wants you dead? Nonetheless, Prime Minister Netanyahu has once again joined with President Trump to try to find a way forward.

Dershowitz vs. the Democrats

Monday, Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz  dismantled the Democrats’ impeachment arguments. He argued that the two articles of impeachment do not rest on identifiable crimes, much less impeachable offenses. I’ll spare you his historical lecture and summarize his main points.

Democrats are attempting to impeach President Trump for “obstruction of Congress” because he refused to comply with many of their demands during the course of their impeachment investigation. 

But what they see as “Obstruction of Congress,” others see as “Separation of Powers.” If defending the authority of the executive branch is a crime, then the founders were criminals. But the left probably believes that anyway. 

When disputes arise over the separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches, they go to the courts to decide the issue. But if it’s a crime for a president to resist Congress when it overreaches, then every president is going to be impeached.

The president is also being impeached for “Abuse of Power.” But that charge is what critics always say about their opponents. Even George Washington, the most admired of our founders, was accused of abusing his power. 

Professor Dershowitz went on to cite 20 presidents, from Washington to Obama, who were accused of abuse of power. For example:

  • Thomas Jefferson dramatically expanded the size of the country through the Louisiana Purchase without congressional authorization.

  • Abraham Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus during the Civil War.

  • Franklin Roosevelt interned Japanese Americans during World War II due to concerns about national security.

Ultimately, Donald Trump is being impeached because he defeated scumbag/liar-Hillary Clinton, which the left considers a “high crime.” He’s also being impeached because he is doing what he said he would do.

He’s putting the interests of the country first with trade deals and immigration policies that put American workers first. He’s defending the sanctity of life and religious liberty by breaking the left’s stranglehold over our courts. Those are Trump’s “crimes,” which our political elites cannot tolerate.

Sadly, there is a group of Republicans who still think The New York Times is a legitimate news outlet. They should forget about John Bolton’s book. As Professor Dershowitz made clear, there is no impeachable crime here regardless of what is or is not in Bolton’s book.

By the way, Fred Fleitz, Bolton’s former chief of staff, published an excellent opinion piece calling on Bolton to withdraw his book until after the 2020 election.

Fleitz argues, rightly in my opinion, that high-level officials should not cash-in on their service with “tell-all” books that threaten to expose the private advice and communications between presidents and their advisers. Sadly, that’s how the Swamp operates.

At yesterday’s White House announcement for the Middle East peace plan, many of John Bolton’s old friends were angry and disappointed in his conduct since he left the administration. More than once, I heard the rhetorical question, “What in the world is wrong with Bolton?!”

Speaking of the Swamp…

Former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi exposed the potential corruption of Hunter Biden’s sweetheart deal with the Ukrainian energy company Burisma, which she described as “nepotistic at best, nefarious at worst." 

She defended President Trump’s decision to raise Burisma and the loose lips liar-Bidens with Ukraine’s president because the media had raised the issue in 2014, because Chris Heinz, Hunter’s business partner, raised concerns about it and because scumbag/liar-nObama State Department officials raised concerns about it.  

Bondi’s presentation made it clear that the president was looking to address past issues of corruption rather than exploiting his office to influence the next election.    ~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/opinion/68205?mailing_id=4829&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4829&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