democrats voted to allow the murder of children. Of course, they won’t call it that.
Senate Democrats on Monday blocked a Republican bill that would have threatened prison time for doctors who don’t try saving the life of infants born alive during failed abortions, leading conservatives to wonder openly whether Democrats were embracing “infanticide” to appeal to left-wing voters.
All prominent Democratic 2020 presidential hopefuls in the Senate voted down the measure, including Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Kamala Harris of California, Cory Booker of New Jersey, Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. The final vote was 53-44 to end Democratic delaying tactics — seven votes short of the 60 needed.
Three Democrats joined Republicans to support the bill — Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania and Doug Jones or Alabama. Three Republicans did not vote, apparently because of scheduling issues and plane flight delays — including Kevin Cramer of North Dakota, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Tim Scott of South Carolina.
The bill stipulated:
The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act would have required that “any health care practitioner present” at the time of a birth “exercise the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence to preserve the life and health of the child as a reasonably diligent and conscientious health care practitioner would render to any other child born alive at the same gestational age.”
Here’s the thing. Born alive babies have Constitutional rights. I know that’s something which makes liberals wretch but it is true. The 14th Amendment:
There is a cancer in the House of Representatives and democrats have their hands full attempting to control it. I warned about this. Ilhan Omar reportedly married her brother and has an interesting history.
She lied about her support for Israel. Of late she has been throwing her newfound stature around and is punching way above her weight class. In apparent support for Nicolas Maduro, she accused Donald Trump of a “coup attempt” in Venezuela.
“A US backed coup in Venezuela is not a solution to the dire issues they face,” Omar tweeted. “Trump’s efforts to install a far right opposition will only incite violence and further destabilize the region. We Must support Mexico, Uruguay, & the Vatican’s efforts to facilitate a peaceful dialogue.”
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) called for a more lenient sentence for nine Somalian men in Minnesota who were convicted of attempting to join ISIS in November 2016.
Omar, then a Minnesota assemblymember-elect, wrote in a letter to the judge presiding the case, Michael Davis, about “the ramifications of sentencing young men who made a consequential mistake to decades in federal prison.”
“Incarcerating 20-year-old men for 30 or 40 years is essentially a life sentence. Society will have no expectations of the to be 50 or 60-year-old released prisoners; it will view them with distrust and revulsion,” Omar wrote. “Such punitive measures not only lack efficacy, they inevitably create an environment in which extremism can flourish, aligning with the presupposition of terrorist recruitment: ‘Americans do not accept you and continue to trivialize your value. Instead of being a nobody, be a martyr.’”
The FBI eavesdropped on telephone calls between President Donald Trump’s national security adviser and the Russian ambassador but found nothing improper, a U.S. intelligence official said.
The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media, said late Monday that there was never a formal “investigation” of the calls in December between retired Army Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn and Sergei Kislyak, Russia’s ambassador in Washington.
According to the source, who was confirming a Washington Post report earlier Monday, intelligence officials merely listened in as part of routine eavesdropping on Kislyak.
Yesterday we learned something critical- proof that Michael Flynn was set up by the FBI to take a fall. Many have wondered why Flynn would talk to the FBI without a lawayer present. It turns out that the FBI told Flynn NOT to include a lawyer.
Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, who arranged the bureau’s interview with then-national security adviser Michael Flynn at the White House on Jan. 24, 2017 — the interview that ultimately led to Flynn’s guilty plea on one count of making false statements — suggested Flynn not have a lawyer present at the session, according to newly-filed court documents. In addition, FBI officials, along with the two agents who interviewed Flynn, decided specifically not to warn him that there would be penalties for making false statements because the agents wanted to ensure that Flynn was “relaxed” during the session.
The new information, drawn from McCabe’s account of events plus the FBI agents’ writeup of the interview — the so-called 302 report — is contained in a sentencing memo filed Tuesday by Flynn’s defense team.
Citing McCabe’s account, the sentencing memo says that shortly after noon on Jan. 24 — the fourth day of the new Trump administration — McCabe called Flynn on a secure phone in Flynn’s West Wing office. The two men discussed business briefly and then McCabe said that he “felt that we needed to have two of our agents sit down” with Flynn to discuss Flynn’s talks with Russian officials during the presidential transition.
Who led this charade? None other than Andrew McCabe:
McCabe, by his own account, urged Flynn to talk to the agents alone, without a lawyer present. “I explained that I thought the quickest way to get this done was to have a conversation between [Flynn] and the agents only,” McCabe wrote. “I further stated that if LTG Flynn wished to include anyone else in the meeting, like the White House counsel for instance, that I would need to involve the Department of Justice. [Flynn] stated that this would not be necessary and agreed to meet with the agents without any additional participants.”
Worst of all?
“The agents did not provide Gen. Flynn with a warning of the penalties for making a false statement under 18 U.S.C. 1001 before, during, or after the interview,” the Flynn memo says. According to the 302, before the interview, McCabe and other FBI officials “decided the agents would not warn Flynn that it was a crime to lie during an FBI interview because they wanted Flynn to be relaxed, and they were concerned that giving the warnings might adversely affect the rapport.”
They screwed him royally. This is atrocious. This is how the Comey/McCabe cabal ran the FBI. The country is once again reminded of the two tiered justice system established by James Comey; one for the democrats, and another for everyone else.
hillary and her aides were allowed to dictate the terms of the investigation and interviews.
Cheryl Mills was allowed to sit in on hillary’s FBI interview. Andy McCarthy:
Finally, something else about those lawyers. I nearly fell out of my chair upon reading the very first paragraph of the notes of Clinton’s interview, which identifies the lawyers for Clinton who were permitted to be present for the interview. Among them is Cheryl Mills, Clinton’s longtime confidant and chief-of-staff at the State Department.
Readers may recall that I suggested back in May that “the fix” was in in the investigation of the Clinton emails. The reason was that the Justice Department was allowing Cheryl Mills – a witness, if not a subject, of the investigation – to invoke attorney-client privilege on behalf of Mrs. Clinton in order to thwart the FBI’s attempt to inquire into the procedure used to produce Clinton’s emails to the State Department. Mills was a participant in that procedure – and it is the procedure in which, we now know, well over 30,000 emails were attempted to be destroyed, including several thousand that contained government-related business.
When she worked for Clinton at State, Mills was not acting in the capacity of a lawyer – not for then-Secretary Clinton and not for the State Department. Moreover, as Clinton’s chief-of-staff, Mills was intimately involved in issues related to Clinton’s private email set up, the discussions about getting her a secure BlackBerry similar to President Obama’s, and questions that were raised (including in FOIA requests) about Clinton’s communications.
Michael Flynn was a three star general with 33 years of service, five of them in combat. He deserves better.
Want more proof that this is pure politics? The leak of the Flynn-Kislyak conversation is an egregious felony but Mueller has zero interest in it. As the Russian collusion fantasy falls apart completely democrats are turning to Trump’s personal finances.
It’s not about justice. It’s all politics and it needs to end. Mueller has created crimes that did not exist prior to his investigation.
In one striking detail, footnotes in the Flynn memo say the 302 report cited was dated Aug. 22, 2017 — nearly seven months after the Flynn interview. It is not clear why the report would be written so long after the interview itself.
Clearly, it went down that way so someone could rewrite it to incriminate Flynn.
Remember way back when it was “Russia Russia Russia” 24 hours a day from all the left wing new outlets?
It’s not any more. Now we’re wading into campaign finance issues and boy do democrats live in a huge glass house. Led by Adam Schiff and Gerald Nadler, democrats are wetting their collective pants over the dream of Trump facing jail time.
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) on Sunday said that President Trump might “face the real prospect of jail time” after prosecutors indicated last week that he directed illegal payments during his 2016 presidential campaign.
“There’s a very real prospect that on the day Donald Trump leaves office, the Justice Department may indict him. That he may be the first president in quite some time to face the real prospect of jail time,” he said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.”
Trump contend that it was merely a financial transaction.
Trump said on Twitter that Democrats were wrongly targeting “a simple private transaction.” Court filings last week drew renewed attention to six-figure payments made during the 2016 presidential campaign by Trump’s personal lawyer to two women so they would not discuss their alleged affairs with the candidate.
Nadler was once again breathless over the news:
U.S. Representative Jerrold Nadler, who will lead the Judiciary Committee when Democrats take control of the House of Representatives next month, said on Sunday that if the payments were found to violate campaign finance laws it would be an impeachable offense.
As I said, dems live in a very large glass house. The obama campaign was hit with a $375,000 fine in 2013. Then we have to issue of hush money paid out by the government. Between 1997 and 2017 $17 million was paid out in 268 instances of sexual harassment. Who pays for this?
A majority of Democrat voters now say that the 12 million illegal aliens currently residing in the United States should be given the right to vote.
In a new poll by Rasmussen Reports, a majority of 54 percent of Democrats said illegal aliens in the U.S. should be given the right to vote so long as they pay taxes. Illegal aliens paying taxes ensures the identity theft of Americans.
Likewise, 53 percent of self-described liberal voters said they too support giving the 12 million illegal aliens in the U.S. the right to vote.
While the majority of Democrats support illegal aliens having the right to vote, the plan is very unpopular with American voters overall. Nearly 60 percent of voters said illegal aliens should not be given voting rights.
Something very important was disclosed today, and it was related to Peter Strzok. The Strzok hearing today was utterly astonishing. It is painfully clear that Peter Strzok, just like James Comey, has an impervious and unflinching sense of self-righteousness and papal infallibility. Strzok absolutely dripped with hubris and audacity.
You will also remember that it was Strzok who changed Clinton’s mishandling of classified information from “gross negligence” to “extremely careless.”
It is not a coincidence that Strzok was in a critical position to control two investigations in which everything that could have gone favorably to Clinton went favorably and everything that could have gone poorly for Trump and associates went poorly. Strzok tried to bury the Clinton emails that were on the Weiner laptop until after the election. And there it is.
A member of the House Committee on the Judiciary said during a hearing Thursday that a government watchdog found that nearly all of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s emails were sent to a foreign entity and that the FBI didn’t follow-up on that finding.
The Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) found an “anomaly on Hillary Clinton’s emails going through their private server, and when they had done the forensic analysis, they found that her emails, every single one except four, over 30,000, were going to an address that was not on the distribution list,” Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas said during a hearing with FBI official Peter Strzok.
“It was going to an unauthorized source that was a foreign entity unrelated to Russia,” he added.
The IC IG told Strzok about this and Strzok did nothing.
Gohmert said the ICIG investigator, Frank Rucker, presented the findings to Strzok, but that the FBI official did not do anything with the information.
Strzok acknowledged meeting with Rucker, but said he did not recall the “specific content.”
“The forensic examination was done by the ICIG and they can document that,” Gohmert said, “but you were given that information and you did nothing with it.”
Here is the exchange:
Gohmert: You said earlier in this hearing you were concerned about a hostile foreign power affecting the election. Do you recall the former Intelligence Community Inspector General Chuck McCullough having an investigation into an anomaly found on Hillary Clinton’s emails?
Let me refresh your memory. The Intelligence Community Inspector General Chuck McCullough sent his investigator Frank Rucker along with an IGIC attorney Janette McMillan to brief you and Dean Chapelle and two other FBI personnel who I won’t name at this time, about an anomaly they had found on Hillary Clinton’s emails that were going to the private unauthorized server that you were supposed to be investigating?
Strzok: I remember meeting Mr. Rucker on either one or two occasions. I do not recall the specific content or discussions.
Gohmert: Mr. Rucker reported to those of you, the four of you there, in the presence of the ICIG attorney, that they had found this anomaly on Hillary Clinton’s emails going through their private server, and when they had done the forensic analysis, they found that her emails, every single one except four, over 30,000, were going to an address that was not on the distribution list. It was a compartmentalized bit of information that was sending it to an unauthorized source. Do you recall that?
Strozk: Sir, I don’t.
Gohmert: He went on the explain it. And you didn’t say anything, you thanked him, you shook his hand. The problem is it was going to an unauthorized source that was a foreign entity unrelated to Russia and from what you’ve said here, you did nothing more than nod and shake the man’s hand when you didn’t seem to be all that concerned about our national integrity of our election when it was involving Hillary Clinton. So the forensic examination was done by the ICIG — and they can document that — but you were given that information and you did nothing with it. And one of the things I found most egregious with Mr. Horowitz’s testimony, and — by the way Mr. Horowitz got a call four times from someone wanting to brief him about this, and he never returned the call.
Strzok had selective amnesia frequently through the day and he was full of crap for the parts in between the memory lapses.
All of Hillary Clinton’s emails were hacked by a foreign actor. She used a vulnerable server, obama knew about it and she compromised the security of the country.That wasn’t extremely careless. It was gross negligence.
And a violation of the Espionage Act.
The irony in this is that despite Strzok’s pledge to “stop” Trump by burying the Clinton emails on the Weiner laptop he might have helped Trump win.
A series of recent events has inspired some soul searching on the part of democrats who still have a brain. Among them, the call to abolish ICE
Sen. Elizabeth Warren: The Massachusetts senator and liberal fixture said Saturday at a rally in Boston: “We need to rebuild our immigration system from top to bottom by starting with replacing ICE with something that reflects our morality.”
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y.: Like Warren, she is a potential 2020 contender. Gillibrand decried ICE as a “deportation force” — a reference to child separation at the border that Trump officials have criticizedas being inaccurately pinned on ICE. She told CNN she would like to get “rid of it, start over, reimagine it and build something that actually works.”
Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wis.: The chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus is working on legislation to eliminate ICE. Reps. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., Jim McGovern, D-Mass., Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., and Mike Capuano, D-Mass., have indicated they would support such a bill, according to Vox.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: The 28-year-old self-declared socialist who defeated fourth-ranking House Democrat Joe Crowley of New York last week. She ran on a platform that includes abolishing ICE.
ICE is tasked with finding and removing MS 13 gang members. The media downplays their threat. Joy Reid thinks MS 13 is a food additive: