TheFrontPageCover
~ Featuring ~  
Who Wants This War With Iran?
Pat Buchanan  
.
scumbag/liar-nObama Federal judge sides 
with House Democrats over subpoena 
for Trump’s financial records
by Gregg Re  
{foxnews.com} ~ A Washington, D.C.-based federal judge has sided with House Oversight Committee Democrats seeking to enforce their subpoena of Trump accounting firm Mazars USA... in a major ruling that breathes new life into Democrats' ongoing efforts to probe the president's financial dealings. The subpoena seeks access to a slew of Trump financial documents dating back to 2011, including personal records and records of various affiliated business and entities. Democrats pursued the subpoena after former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen testified to Congress in February that the president's accountants routinely and improperly altered his financial statements -- including some signed by Mazars -- to misrepresent his assets and liabilities. Barack scumbag/liar-nObama-appointed judge Amit P. Mehta's 41-page opinion began by comparing President Trump's concerns about congressional overreach to those of President James Buchanan, asserting that Trump "has taken up the fight of his predecessor." And Mehta acknowledged a high likelihood that any documents obtained by House Democrats would quickly leak, and become partisan political fodder. "The court is not naïve to reality," Mehta wrote, admitting there "is a chance that some records obtained from Mazars will become public soon after they are produced." Mehta added that he was "well aware that this case involves records concerning the private and business affairs of the President of the United States," dating back to well before he declared his candidacy...  https://www.foxnews.com/politics/federal-judge-house-democrats-maza...  
.
Doug Collins Releases Transcripts 
of Nine Former DOJ and FBI Officials
by sundance
theconservativetreehouse.com } ~ I hope everyone is ready to do some reading….Moments ago Judiciary Committee ranking member Doug Collins released the transcripts of nine key figures from the House investigation into DOJ and FBI political activity... The transcript release includes testimony from: Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe  Former U.S. Attorney General liar-Loretta Lynch  scumbag-James Comey former chief-of-staff James Rybicki  Former FBI lawyer, Office of Legal Counsel, Trisha Beth Anderson  Deputy Asst. Attorney General (DOJ-NSD), George Toscas  FBI Deputy Asst. Director, Jonathan Moffa  Former FBI Executive Assistant Director of the National Security Branch, John Giaclone  FBI Unit Chief, Office of Legal Counsel, Sally Moye  FBI New York Field Office, Assistant Director in Charge, William F. Sweeney Jr. This could be overwhelming. So we will post two transcripts per day for full review starting below with the transcript of FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe...
.
White House tells McGahn to defy House 
subpoena, as DOJ asserts 'immunity'
by Brooke Singman and John Roberts  
foxnews.com } ~ President Trump has directed former White House Counsel Don McGahn to skip a House Judiciary Committee hearing scheduled for Tuesday... citing a Justice Department opinion that he cannot be compelled to testify about his official duties. In a statement released Monday afternoon, White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders blasted Democrats for continuing to pursue Trump investigations, saying they want a "wasteful and unnecessary do-over" in the wake of Special Counsel dirty cop-Robert Mueller's probe -- and describing the subpoena for McGahn as part of that. "The House Judiciary Committee has issued a subpoena to try and force Mr. McGahn to testify again. The Department of Justice has provided a legal opinion stating that, based on long-standing, bipartisan, and Constitutional precedent, the former Counsel to the President cannot be forced to give such testimony, and Mr. McGahn has been directed to act accordingly," Sanders said. "This action has been taken in order to ensure that future Presidents can effectively execute the responsibilities of the Office of the Presidency." The related DOJ memo said McGahn, like other senior advisers to a president, has "immunity" from being compelled to testify about his official duties. "This immunity applies to the former White House Counsel. Accordingly, Mr. McGahn is not legally required to appear and testify about matters related to his official duties as Counsel to the President," the memo said. The New York Times first reported that the president would likely direct McGahn to skip the hearing. The move could set the stage for the panel to vote to hold the former White House counsel in contempt for defying a congressionally issued subpoena. Fox News is told the committee still intends to meet on Tuesday, whether or not McGahn is present...   https://www.foxnews.com/politics/white-house-mcgahn-house-hearing  
.
White House Responds to scumbag liar-Nadler Subpoena for Counsel Don McGahn
by sundance
theconservativetreehouse.com } ~ Most media have avoided highlighting how scumbag liar-Jerry Nadler has not demanded testimony from presumed author of the special counsel report, dirty cop-Robert Mueller... It is likely the Judiciary Committee’s lack of interest surrounds the fact they know dirty cop-Mueller was a figurehead with no substantive control over the small group led by Andrew Weissmann. The special counsel probe, with sunlight upon dirty cop-Mueller, would be a risk to scumbag liar-Nadler. AG Bill Barr has no issue with dirty cop-Mueller testifying; likely because he too knows dirty cop-Mueller appearing for testimony without his “small group” handlers could lead to a full collapse of the special counsel/media narrative. Meanwhile, the White House delivers a response to House Judiciary Committee Chairman scumbag liar-Jerry Nadler following his subpoena for former White House Counsel Don McGahn: At the President’s direction, the White House has been completely transparent with the Special Counsel’s investigation. The Special Counsel received more than 1.4 million documents and hours and hours of interviews from White House officials, including more than 30 hours from former Counsel to the President, Don McGahn. The Democrats do not like the conclusion of the dirty cop-Mueller investigation – no collusion, no conspiracy, and no obstruction – and want a wasteful and unnecessary do-over. The House Judiciary Committee has issued a subpoena to try and force Mr. McGahn to testify again. The Department of Justice has provided a legal opinion stating that, based on long-standing, bipartisan, and Constitutional precedent, the former Counsel to the President cannot be forced to give such testimony, and Mr. McGahn has been directed to act accordingly. This action has been taken in order to ensure that future Presidents can effectively execute the responsibilities of the Office of the Presidency...
.
Fox Host Dagen McDowell 
Blows Up at Annoying Juan
by S.Noble
{independentsentinel.com} ~This is Friday’s news, but in case you missed it, Dagen McDowell blew up on the champion of mindless talking points Juan Williams... whose only retort was read the newspapers for answers and, “Oh go on, get out of here.” She was fierce in her response to Juan about the deep state officials who will be worried about what the Attorney General’s review might find. Ms. McDowell said the reason the FBI and DOJ officials are attacking Attorney General Bill Barr is that they are afraid of what they may find. Juan defended the Democrats. “What’s going on is an investigation of the investigators as punishment coming from an administration that is overwhelmingly political. Right now, really, they are distracting from the real news with all of this silliness.” “It’s not silliness, Juan if there was corruption,” she shot back, her voice rising in anger. “It’s not silliness if there was an abuse of power. And you know why scumbag/liar-Hillary Clinton is being quiet about this? Because the DNC and scumbag/liar-Hillary Clinton’s campaign paid for that dossier, which could be disinformation by Russia.” Dagen added that the “whole dirty cop-Mueller report basically discredits big, big elements that were in that dossier.” Juan then went to the polls, repeating the stats selectively. He claimed that a Fox News poll found that “45% of Americans believe that Barr is covering up for Trump and not being transparent. They give him a negative rating for how he handled the dirty cop-Mueller report; 44% say they don’t approve of what he has done with the dirty cop-Mueller report.” She addressed Williams’ alleged poll results. Dagen said she saw the poll and noted that 58% think it’s at least somewhat likely the FBI broke the law. She said millions of Americans deserve answers. There’s nothing wrong with that. The entire time, Juan was making that annoying face he gets when he has nothing sane to say. It’s his last resort...   https://www.independentsentinel.com/fox-host-dagen-mcdowell-blows-u...  
.
.
.
Who Wants This War With Iran?

Pat Buchanan

townhall.com } ~ Speaking on state TV of the prospect of a war in the Gulf, Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei seemed to dismiss the idea.

"There won't be any war. ... We don't seek a war, and (the Americans) don't either. They know it's not in their interests."

The ayatollah's analysis -- a war is in neither nation's interest -- is correct. Consider the consequences of a war with the United States for his own country.

Iran's hundreds of swift boats and handful of submarines would be sunk. Its ports would be mined or blockaded. Oil exports and oil revenue would halt. Air fields and missile bases would be bombed. The Iranian economy would crash. Iran would need years to recover.

And though Iran's nuclear sites are under constant observation and regular inspection, they would be destroyed.

Tehran knows this, which is why, despite 40 years of hostility, Iran has never sought war with the "Great Satan" and does not want this war to which we seem to be edging closer every day.

What would such a war mean for the United States?

It would not bring about "regime change" or bring down Iran's government that survived eight years of ground war with Saddam Hussein's Iraq.

If we wish to impose a regime more to our liking in Tehran, we will have to do it the way we did it with Germany and Japan after 1945, or with Iraq in 2003. We would have to invade and occupy Iran.

But in World War II, we had 12 million men under arms. And unlike Iraq in 2003, which is one-third the size and population of Iran, we do not have the hundreds of thousands of troops to call up and send to the Gulf.

Nor would Americans support such an invasion, as President Donald Trump knows from his 2016 campaign. Outside a few precincts, America has no enthusiasm for a new Mideast war, no stomach for any occupation of Iran.

Moreover, war with Iran would involve firefights in the Gulf that would cause at least a temporary shutdown in oil traffic through the Strait of Hormuz -- and a worldwide recession.

How would that help the world? Or Trump in 2020?

How many allies would we have in such a war?

Spain has pulled its lone frigate out of John Bolton's flotilla headed for the Gulf. Britain, France and Germany are staying with the nuclear pact, continuing to trade with Iran, throwing ice water on our intelligence reports that Iran is preparing to attack us.

Turkey regards Iran as a cultural and economic partner. Russia was a de facto ally in Syria's civil war. China continues to buy Iranian oil. India just hosted Iran's foreign minister.

So, again, Cicero's question: "Cui bono?"

Who really wants this war? How did we reach this precipice?

A year ago, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo issued a MacArthurian ultimatum, making 12 demands on the Tehran regime.

Iran must abandon all its allies in the Middle East -- Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, Hamas in Gaza -- pull all forces under Iranian command out of Syria, and then disarm all its Shiite militia in Iraq.

Iran must halt all enrichment of uranium, swear never to produce plutonium, shut down its heavy water reactor, open up its military bases to inspection to prove it never had a secret nuclear program and stop testing missiles. And unless she submits, Iran will be strangled with sanctions.

Pompeo's speech at the Heritage Foundation read like the terms of some conquering Caesar dictating to some defeated tribe in Gaul, though we had yet to fight and win the war, usually a precondition for dictating terms.

Iran's response was to disregard Pompeo's demands.

And crushing U.S. sanctions were imposed, to brutal effect.

Yet, as one looks again at the places where Pompeo ordered Iran out -- Lebanon, Yemen, Gaza, Syria, Iraq -- no vital interest of ours was imperiled by any Iranian presence.

The people who have a problem with Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon are the Israelis whose occupations spawned those movements.

As for Yemen, the Houthis overthrew a Saudi puppet.

Syria's Bashar Assad never threatened us, though we armed rebels to overthrow him. In Iraq, Iranian-backed Shiite militia helped us to defend Baghdad from the southerly advance of ISIS, which had taken Mosul.

Who wants us to plunge back into the Middle East, to fight a new and wider war than the ones we fought already this century in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya and Yemen?

Answer: Pompeo and Bolton, Bibi Netanyahu, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and the Sunni kings, princes, emirs, sultans and the other assorted Jeffersonian democrats on the south shore of the Persian Gulf.

And lest we forget, the never-Trumpers and neocons in exile nursing their bruised egos, whose idea of sweet revenge is a U.S. return to the Mideast in a war with Iran, which then brings an end to the Trump presidency.

Views: 9

Comment

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

Join Tea Party Command Center

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Political Cartoons by AF BrancoPolitical Cartoons by AF Branco

ALERT ALERT

OMG!!! Ruth Bader Ginsburg Voted Best Real-Life Hero At MTV Awards

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Monday was crowned the best real-life hero at the MTV Movie & TV Awards.

The 86-year old judge — whose 2015 biopic The Notorious RBG help cement her as a cultural icon among Liberals — beat out tennis star Serena Williams, WWE wrestler Roman Reigns, and comedian Hannah Gadsby to take him the award.

Though it wasn’t a clean sweep for Ginsburg last night.

The RGB documentary lost the “Best Fight” category for “Ruth Bader Ginsburg vs. Inequality” to “Captain Marvel vs. Minn-Erva.”

The justice was absent from the ceremony in Santa Monica, California.

Last December, Ginsburg had surgery to remove cancerous growths on her left lung. She was released from the hospital in New York four days later and recuperated at home.

Earlier this year, Ginsburg missed three days of arguments, the first time that’s happened since she joined the court in 1993. Still, she was allowed to participate using court briefs and transcripts.

Ginsburg has had two previous bouts with cancer, in 1999 and 10 years later.

Flashback: Ruth Bader Ginsburg: A Pregnant Woman Is Not A ‘Mother’

Celebrated liberal U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg argued in an opinion released Tuesday that a pregnant woman is not a “mother.”

“[A] woman who exercises her constitutionally protected right to terminate a pregnancy is not a ‘mother’,” Ginsburg wrote in a footnote, which in turn responded to another footnote in the 20-page concurring opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas in the Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky Inc. case.

As Breitbart News’ legal editor Ken Klukowski reported, the case concerned a law signed by then-Governor (now Vice President) Mike Pence of Indiana in 2016, which required that the remains of an aborted fetus (or baby) be disposed of by cremation or burial. The law also prohibited abortion on the basis of sex, race, or disability alone.

The Court upheld the first part of the law, but declined to consider the selective-abortion ban until more appellate courts had ruled on it.

In his lengthy opinion — which delighted pro-life advocates, and distressed pro-choice activists — Thomas wrote that “this law and other laws like it promote a State’s compelling interest in preventing abortion from becoming a tool of modern-day eugenics.” He traced the racist and eugenicist beliefs of Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger, and warned that the Court would one day need to wrestle with abortion as form of racial discrimination.

In a footnote, Thomas attacked Ginsberg’s dissenting opinion, which argued the Court should not have deferred to the legal standard used by the litigants in the lower courts, but should have subjected the Indiana law to a more difficult standard instead, since it impacted “the right of [a] woman” to an abortion.

Ginsburg cited no legal authority for her claim that a pregnant woman is not a “mother.” The claim that a fetus is not a child is central to pro-choice arguments.

SPECIAL VIDEOS

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service