Mueller/Dem Horse-Pucky


John R. Houk

© May 30, 2019

 

I was not surprised Dems – especially in the House – reacted to Robert Mueller’s news conference with “impeach Trump”. The Dems and their propaganda MSM wing have twisted, misrepresented facts and downright lied about President Trump before, after and right up to the very present.

 

Mueller was forced to admit there was no crime of Donald Trump working with the Russians to insure a 2016 election victory. Mueller did inform what everyone has known for a long time – the Russians made an evil effort to influence the 2016 election cycle. MUELLER’S EPIC FAILURE of what is probably closer to the truth: The Russians gave aid to the Clinton campaign to influence the election and aid to the Dems to make the effort to impeach President Trump after the election.

 

Trump committed NO election crime but because the President wouldn’t fall for the perjury trap set for others involved in the 2016 campaign with a personal interview, Mueller implied Trump made an effort to obstruct an investigation where no crime existed.

 

AND THAT MY FRIENDS is why Mueller, Mueller’s 13 angry Dem/Hillary donating Prosecutors AND the Dems are full of horse-pucky.

 

Since it is doubtful most news sources – spoken or written – will let you know about Mueller/Dem horse-pucky, here are a series of commentaries on the Mueller news conference.

 

JRH 5/30/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

**********************

Special Counsel Mueller Gives Final Back Stabbing To Trump In Press Briefing To Help Democrats

 

By Jim Kouri

May 30th, 2019

News With Views

 

Special Counsel Robert Mueller held a special news conference on Wednesday saying he couldn’t reach a conclusion on whether Donald Trump obstructed justice, as he stopped short of delivering a full exoneration of the president. Mueller, using the craftiness of a career lawyer and political operative chose his words to allow Democrats in Congress to continue their deranged pursuit of destroying the President using the criminal justice system and the impeachment process.

 

“If we had had confidence the president clearly did not commit a crime we would have said so,” Mueller said. His briefing — which denied questions from reporters — on the investigation showed he was disappointed in not proving anything against Trump.

“That’s why Mueller left open the obstruction question, something the Democrats are using to harass a President they despise,” said political strategist Mike Barker. “The only good news I heard was Mueller announcing that he was closing his office and resigning from public service,” he added.

 

Mueller sent a clear signal to House Democrats who have demanded his testimony that he won’t provide any information that hasn’t already been made public. “Any testimony from this office would not go beyond this report,” he said.

 

The special counsel also said he found “insufficient evidence to charge a broader conspiracy” on election interference.

 

President Donald Trump’s newly appointed Attorney General, while keeping a relatively low profile in his first days on the job, now appears to have hit the ground running in his investigation of what many are now calling The Trump-Russia Hoax.

 

On Tuesday and Wednesday, the Trump-hating Democrats and news media were taken-aback when they discovered Barr had already begun his probe of the now-famous Hillary Clinton bought and paid for “dirty dossier.”

 

Barr selected U.S. Attorney for Connecticut John Durham to investigate the origins of the Justice Department’s and the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s probe of — and spying on —

the Trump presidential campaign in 2016. The questionable investigation continued into the Trump transition and his early weeks as Commander-in-Chief.

 

John Durham, who is the U.S. Attorney in Connecticut, was appointed by Attorney General Bill Barr. He will examine the FBI’s decision to open a counterintelligence investigation into the actions and motives for interfering in the election and “chasing” members of President Donald Trump’s campaign team using arguably misleading or false evidence to obtain warrants. The now famous “dirty dossier” is based on lies and innuendo provided by a foreign agent, a former British MI6 officer Christopher Steele.

 

Deep State Suspects in Conspiracy to Overthrow an Elected President

 

Robert Mueller is the leader of the Trump ouster who are now trying to defend the Deep State’s control over American politics from Donald Trump’s assault on its tyrannical vision. In the process Mueller also hopes to atone for the firing of his friend and fellow conspirator, James Comey.  Unfortunately many Americans cannot see that this man is not a “pillar of impartiality” as the corrupt media paint him. He is deeply committed to Deep State corruption while impersonating a Republican.

 

Rod Rosenstein is the Deputy Attorney General appointed by Obama. This is one reason for his insistence on appointing Robert Mueller as a Special Counsel to investigate Trump for alleged collusion with the Russians. His agenda is preservation of the Deep State as is Mueller’s. He would have been much happier if Hillary had won. In fact he was surely expecting it, as were FBI personnel such as Andrew McCabe.

 

Andrew Weissmann is the primary “witch hunter” on the Mueller team assembled to investigate Russian collusion. He is a notorious pit bull prosecutor with a record of suppressing exculpatory evidence in overreaching prosecutions that have been overturned by judges. He was a “Gung-Ho” Obama supporter. He is known to use questionable tactics in bullying a target’s underlings to force their testimony.

 

Peter Strzok was another Obama-loving FBI agent employed by Mueller because of his experience in counterintelligence. He is known as a devout Hillary Clinton supporter and one of the agents who interviewed Hillary about the email scandal, which turned out to be a phony powder-puff interview. He also edited Comey’s Clinton investigation resolution by replacing the words “grossly negligent” with “extremely careless” because the former action can be prosecuted in the handling of classified information while the latter cannot. His investigation gave almost all of Clinton’s subordinates blanket immunity even though none of them testified against Clinton.

 

Is this, as the media claims, a professional and objective team of crimefighters committed to solving an alleged crime? or was this is a coup d’etat to destroy the election of Donald Trump and and move to impeach him, which Mueller and his cronies had hoped would discredit the “people’s revolution” against the Deep State that Trump has fashioned.

 

“This horrendous nightmare is taking place because of the collectivist corruption of the DOJ and the FBI under Obama, Clinton and the two Bushes. Corruption in practice takes place in men’s institutions only after corruption of ethics and ideology takes place in their minds. Moral relativism (along with political collectivism) took over the minds of our professors, politicians and prosecutors in the aftermath of World War II and exploded throughout our culture from the 1960s to today. The chickens are now coming home to roost and usher in an authoritarian society,” said Jeffrey Longeran, a former criminal/civil investigations manager.

 

Conservatives in Congress should show they have spines and they should counterattack Hillary Clinton a[t] the Deep State with an investigation of the egregious “Uranium One” money grab in which she authorized the sale of 20% of America’s uranium to Russia, which brought tens of millions of dollars into the Clinton Foundation from Russian sources.

 

The fingerprints of Mueller, Weissmann and Rosenstein are also on the Uranium One deal, for they worked assiduously to facilitate and protect its completion, knowing full well but not caring that it compromised American security. Because their stalwart political horse, Hillary Clinton, was benefiting. Thus the Deep State’s aggrandizement was benefiting.

 

“This scenario is unbelievable. The Mueller Probe corruption is something we would expect to find in an African or Latin American country, or one of the Nazi Show Trials under judges who took an oath to serve Adolph Hitler in the 1930’s. It is the result of obsessively partisan FBI leaders that have let their ideology and hatred influence their role as policemen.

_______________________

Mueller: ‘I couldn’t find a Trump-Crime…so it’s Time to Impeach him!’

 

Trump-Barr-Mueller

 

By Sher Zieve 

May 30, 2019

Canada Free Press

 

I have never before witnessed such a sham of a legal system or—even worse—experienced the horror that the real criminals were the ones running it.  The additional horror is that other gangsters have and/or are replacing those who have been fired (some likely awaiting the day when they will be arrested) or have run for the proverbial hills upon realizing what may soon be revealed.  Having personally experienced this lifetime for not quite—but getting closer each day—a century, I do have some small perspective with regards to history.  Mueller—with all of the Trump-haters on his staff—could find that President Trump committed no crime.  So, in his own rather sleazy way, he turned it over to Congress to impeach him.  This is the caliber of human being we currently have in upper management within the bowels of the US government.

 

I, and certainly others, have written about Robert Swan Mueller III and his apparent crimes committed over the years under the color of law.  One of these was sending 4 innocent people to prison, in order to protect the murderer Whitey Bulger who had been designated “an informer” to and for Mueller’s FBI.  Mueller had also interviewed with President Trump to get his old job as FBI Director back.  But, President Trump didn’t choose him.  Uh-oh!  However, Mueller was chosen by Assistant Attorney General Rod Rosenstein as “Special Counsel” to head up the investigation of President Trump; whom he at the very least intensely disliked.

 

To briefly recap, this investigation was built upon a foundation of sand which included the following:

 

  • A self-proclaimed Trump-hater and (former?) British MI-6 agent who worked with some Russians to create (out of whole cloth) the now-infamous “Trump Dossier”:

 

  • The Clinton Campaign and DNC funded the “dossier”:  “The DNC and Clinton campaign-funded research continued through the end of October 2016, according to the Post’s report.

 

  • The “dossier” was requested and paid for by the Clinton Campaign.  Excerpt:  “According to the report, lawyer Marc E. Elias, who represented both Clinton’s campaign and the DNC, and his law firm Perkins Coie retained the firm Fusion GPS in April 2016 to investigate any connections, according to the Post. Before then, a still-unknown Republican client funded Fusion GPS’ research during the Republican primaries. Fusion had hired former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele to conduct the research.”

 

  • The Mueller investigation began as a counter-intelligence investigation which metastasized into a full-blown criminal investigation…with NO CRIME mentioned!  As a stated crime is required by law before this type of investigation may begin, Mueller’s investigation…was illegal from its inception.  As a very large side-note “collusion” is still not a crime.

 

  • If there is no underlying crime…there can be no “obstruction of justice!”

 

The crimes which were committed by members within our own governmental agencies (DOJ/FBI, CIA, NSA etc.) are the greatest uncovered in the history of our country and are vast to the point that the uncovering of the worldwide Deep State conspiracy against POTUS Trump continues.  Note:  Within the UK, it appears to reach the very highest levels of government.

 

IMO, Mueller has been a dirty cop for decades (also remember his “Uranium One” activities indicating alleged treason) and he doesn’t appear to have any intention of changing.  Our country was close to demise before Donald J. Trump was resoundingly elected to the presidency of the USA.  Considering all of the blocks placed in his way by the DNC, RINOs and US government “intelligence” agencies Trump’s accomplishments are nothing less than remarkable…and legendary.  Think what he will accomplish in his second term of office…

 

“There are six things that the Lord hates, seven that are an abomination to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that make haste to run to evil, a false witness who breathes out lies, and one who sows discord among brothers”—Proverbs 6:16-19

 

_______________________

Judicial Watch President Calls for Investigation Into Mueller

 

By TTN Staff

2019-05-30

Trump Train News

 

VIDEO: Tom Fitton Discusses Mueller Statement With Lou Dobbs

[Posted by TheDC Shorts

Uploaded on May 29, 2019] 

 

The president of Judicial Watch, Tom Fitton, who investigates government corruption, is calling for an investigation into Robert Mueller.

According to The Daily Caller:

 

Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton called for an investigation into Robert Mueller for suggesting “wrongdoing by an innocent person without any foundation.”

“Well, I don’t know what reputation he had that deserved any credence until now, but it’s no longer there,” Fitton told Dobbs. “He’s really destroyed whatever reputation he’s had with this political attack on the president, turning the rule of law on its head, suggesting the president is guilty and, because he can’t prove otherwise, we should conclude that he should be impeached.”

Calling it “an abuse of power,” Fitton said that Attorney General Barr has been “too deferential” to Mueller and should have “shut down” the “report before it was even written.”

“[I]t’s been abuse piled on top of abuse targeting President Trump,” Fitton said. “And this Mr. Mueller, he needs to be investigated as well. The office of professional responsibility should be asking, ‘Why did this Justice Department prosecutor come out and suggest wrongdoing by an innocent person without any foundation?’ Because there is no foundation. If there was a foundation, there would have been indictments or requests for an indictment while highlighting that. Outrageous.”

 

Fitton claims that there is a strong possibility that Mueller and Comey could have colluded in order to direct the investigation in a negative way against the president.

_____________________

DERSHOWITZ BLASTS MUELLER FOR ‘EXCEEDING HIS ROLE’

Statement ‘worse’ than Comey’s regarding Hillary scandal

 

May 29, 2019

WND

 

Then-FBI Director Robert Mueller, left, acknowledges applause during then-President Barack Obama’s remarks on June 21, 2013. Obama had announced James Comey, right, as his nominee to succeed Mueller as FBI director (Official White House photo)

 

Special counsel Robert Mueller’s statement Wednesday that “if we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime we would have said that” is worse than then FBI Director James Comey’s statement about the FBI’s probe of Hillary Clinton, said Alan Dershowitz, emeritus professor at Harvard Law School.

 

“Comey was universally criticized for going beyond his responsibility to state whether there was sufficient evidence to indict Clinton,” he wrote Wednesday in The Hill. “Mueller, however, did even more.”

 

Comey declared in a July 2016 press conference that “although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive highly classified information.”

 

Dershowitz said Mueller, at his news conference at the Justice Department announcing his resignation as special counsel, “went beyond the conclusion of his report and gave a political gift to Democrats in Congress who are seeking to institute impeachment proceedings against President Trump.”

 

“By implying that President Trump might have committed obstruction of justice, Mueller effectively invited Democrats to institute impeachment proceedings,” he said.

 

Dershowitz noted that obstruction of justice is a “high crime and misdemeanor” which, under the Constitution, authorizes impeachment and removal of the president.

 

WND reported earlier Wednesday Mueller’s claim that the Office of Legal Counsel guidance specifying that a sitting president cannot be indicted was the reason for not coming to a conclusion about obstruction conflicts with Attorney General William Barr’s testimony.

 

Barr told Congress on May 1 that at a March 5 meeting with Mueller, the special counsel told him “that he emphatically was not saying that, but for the OLC opinion, he would have found obstruction.”

 

No longer defending Mueller

 

Dershowitz said he no longer is defending Mueller against the accusations that he is a partisan.

 

“I did not believe that he personally favored either the Democrats or the Republicans, or had a point of view on whether President Trump should be impeached. But I have now changed my mind.”

 

The law professor said Mueller revealed his bias by putting his “elbow” on the scale of justice.

 

Mueller also has distorted the role of a prosecutor who “should never go beyond publicly disclosing that there is insufficient evidence to indict.”

 

“No responsible prosecutor should ever suggest that the subject of his investigation might indeed be guilty even if there was insufficient evidence or other reasons not to indict,” Dershowitz said.

 

He pointed out that federal investigations by prosecutors, including special counsels, are by nature one sided, hearing only evidence of guilt.

 

“They are not in a position to decide whether the subject of the investigation is guilty or is innocent of any crimes.”

Dershowitz said he “cannot imagine a plausible reason why Mueller went beyond his report and gratuitously suggested that President Trump might be guilty, except to help Democrats in Congress and to encourage impeachment talk and action.”

 

“Shame on Mueller for abusing his position of trust and for allowing himself to be used for such partisan advantage,” he wrote.

_______________________

Mueller Just Proved His Entire Operation Was A Political Hit Job That Trampled The Rule Of Law

At a hastily arranged Wednesday press conference, Special Counsel Robert Mueller proved that he was never interested in justice or the rule of law.

 

Robert Mueller

 

By Sean Davis

May 29, 2019

The Federalist

 

If there were any doubts about Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s political intentions, his unprecedented press conference on Wednesday should put them all to rest. As he made abundantly clear during his doddering reading of a prepared statement that repeatedly contradicted itself, Mueller had no interest in the equal application of the rule of law. He gave the game, and his nakedly political intentions, away repeatedly throughout his statement.

 

“It is important that the office’s written work speak for itself,” Mueller said, referring to his office’s 448-page report. Mueller’s report was released to the public by Attorney General William Barr nearly six weeks ago. The entire report, minus limited redactions required by law, has been publicly available, pored through, and dissected. Its contents have been discussed ad nauseum in print and on television. The report has been speaking for itself since April 18, when it was released.

 

If it’s important for the work to speak for itself, then why did Mueller schedule a press conference in which he would speak for it weeks after it was released? The statement, given the venue in which it was provided, is self-refuting.

 

Let’s start with the Mueller team’s unique take on the nature of a prosecutor’s job. The standard American view of justice, affirmed and enforced by the U.S. Constitution, is that all are presumed innocent absent conviction by a jury of a specific charge of criminal wrongdoing. That is, the natural legal state of an individual in this country is innocence. It is not a state or a nature bestowed by cops or attorneys. Innocence is not granted by unelected bureaucrats or federal prosecutors.

 

At one point in his remarks, Mueller seemed to agree. Referring to indictments against various Russian individuals and institutions for allegedly hacking American servers during the 2016 election, Mueller said that the indictments “contain allegations and we are not commenting on the guilt or innocence of any specific defendant.”

 

“Every defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.”

 

Had he stopped there, he would have been correct. But then he crafted a brand new standard.

 

“The order appointing the special counsel authorized us to investigate actions that could obstruct the investigation. We conducted that investigation and kept the office of the acting attorney general apprised of our work,” Mueller said. “After that investigation, if we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so.”

 

According to Mueller and his team, charged Russians are presumed innocent. An American president, however, is presumed guilty unless and until Mueller’s team determines he is innocent. Such a standard is an obscene abomination against the rule of law, one that would never be committed by independent attorneys who place a fidelity to their oaths and impartial enforcement of the law ahead of their political motivations.

 

The contradictions and double standards didn’t stop there, though.

 

“It would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution of the actual charge,” Mueller said, after all but stating that Trump committed a crime for which Mueller never charged him. Just as Mueller’s own words and actions at the Wednesday press conference prove that he didn’t want his team’s report to speak for itself, the report itself proves that Mueller and his team don’t believe it’s unfair to accuse somebody of something a court cannot resolve.

 

If they actually believed that, then the 240-page volume II of their report on their obstruction investigation of the president would never have been authored. After all, according to Mueller’s own statement, such an operation would be patently unfair. And if it’s unfair to air dirty laundry against a target who was never charged, surely it’s doubly unfair to do so in writing and on camera during a press conference whose mere existence refutes the very claims of its host.

 

Mueller revealed himself as little more than a clone of James Comey—the smarmy, scheming politician who replaced Mueller as the head of the FBI. Recall that it was Comey who assumed for himself powers that did not belong to him by law when he declared at a 2016 press conference no “reasonable prosecutor” would charge Hillary Clinton with criminal wrongdoing in her mishandling of classified information and unsanctioned use of a secret, private email server to evade public records laws. Just as Mueller did in his report and Wednesday press conference, Comey followed up his declaration that Hillary would not be charged with statement after statement after statement of all the awful things Hillary Clinton did.

 

“There is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information,” Comey said of Clinton. He excoriated her for repeatedly sending and receiving top secret information on her unsecured server which had never been authorized to process classified information. He even said it was possible, due to her “extreme” carelessness, that hostile foreign actors had penetrated her system and obtained highly classified information about U.S. national security programs.

 

Regardless of how you feel about Clinton, Comey’s display at that press conference was an embarrassment. He did an extreme disservice to the nation and the rule of law by unilaterally declaring himself the primary arbiter of prosecutorial decisions in the federal government when that authority belongs solely to the Department of Justice. And he did an extreme disservice to Clinton herself by dragging her through the mud in such a manner that clearing her name would be impossible.

 

In fact, DOJ guidelines expressly prohibit the actions of both Comey and Mueller in naming and shaming individuals who were never formally charged with any wrongdoing.

 

“As a series of cases makes clear, there is ordinarily ‘no legitimate governmental interest served’ by the government’s public allegation of wrongdoing by an uncharged party, and this is true ‘regardless of what criminal charges may . . . b[e] contemplated by the Assistant United States Attorney against the [third-party] for the future,’” states DOJ’s formal policy manual on the duties of federal prosecutors and principles of federal prosecutions.

 

Nationwide bar rules governing all practicing attorneys in the United States also explicitly prohibit Mueller’s display during Wednesday’s press conference.

 

“The prosecutor in a criminal case shall … refrain from making extrajudicial comments that have a substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnation of the accused,” states Rule 3.8(f) of the American Bar Association’s rules of professional conduct.

 

Multiple federal agents and prosecutors reached out to The Federalist after Mueller’s press conference to express dismay at the former FBI director’s behavior.

 

“I’d have been crucified under this rule for a ‘not innocent’ comment about an uncharged party,” a former federal prosecutor told The Federalist. “I literally cannot fathom holding a press conference to say that an uncharged person was not innocent.”

 

“I wish these former FBI directors would learn their lessons: keep your mouths shut unless you’re referring a case for prosecution,” Jeff Danik, a retired FBI supervisor, said during a phone interview with The Federalist on Wednesday.

 

Mueller’s performance made it clear for all to see that what he ran for the last two years wasn’t an independent investigation pursuant to the rule of law so much as an inquisition motivated by political animus. Mueller and his team refused to charge prominent Democrats for crimes he charged against Republicans. Paul Manafort was charged with unregistered lobbying for foreign governments, while Mueller left alone long-time Democrat donor Tony Podesta and former Obama White House Counsel Greg Craig.

 

George Papadopoulos and Michael Flynn were charged with making false statements to federal investigators, while Clinton campaign cronies Glenn Simpson and Christopher Steele’s false statements to Congress and the FBI were ignored. Trump’s nonexistent Russian connections were plumbed while a dubious Clinton campaign-funded dossier sourced directly to Russian officials was used as a prosecutorial roadmap rather than rock-solid evidence of actual campaign collusion with the Kremlin.

 

Mueller claimed his report spoke for itself, then put together a completely unnecessary press conference more than a month after his report’s public release, in which he not just spoke for the report, but expounded on the new legal standards he created to govern its conclusions.

 

These are the actions not of an impartial and independent investigator, but of a scheming political operative. None of this is any surprise to anyone who has followed Mueller’s tenure in government. As FBI director, Mueller repeatedly misused and abused the authority granted to him by Congress.

 

Mueller and Comey utterly bungled the federal investigation into the 2001 Anthrax attacks, resulting in a $5.8 million judgment against the government after the two men falsely accused an innocent man of being behind the attacks.

 

Even after the court judgment against him, Mueller was defiant.

 

“I do not apologize for any aspect of the investigation,” Mueller said afterward. He then doubled down and said it would be wrong to say there were any mistakes in how he handled the investigation.

 

Then there was Mueller’s handling as FBI director of a case in which FBI agents framed innocent men of murders the FBI knew had been committed by their own informants. One of the innocent men died in prison awaiting justice for a crime he never committed.

 

Then, as special counsel to investigate Russian collusion during the 2016 campaign, Mueller promptly hired partisan Democrats to run his investigation. He tapped as investigators FBI personnel who openly discussed their hatred of Trump and his voters, as well as their plans to keep him out of office.

 

There’s no longer any doubt about who Robert Mueller is or why he conducted himself the way he did. As abominable as his press conference was, we should in many ways be thankful that Mueller so willingly displayed for all to see his disdain for basic rules of prosecutorial conduct, his total lack of self-awareness, and his naked desire to stick it to Trump.

 

Sean Davis is the co-founder of The Federalist.

++++++

Other voices noting the horse-pucky:

 

Bogus Mueller Investigation Ends With His Sudden Retirement; By Judi McLeod; Canada Free Press; 5/30/19

 

Mueller is a Coward; By M. Noonan; Blogs For Victory; 5/29/19

 

DEMOCRATS INSULT TRUMP, ACCUSE, THEN WONDER WHY HE WALKS AWAY; By Timothy Benton; Ocensor; 5/29/19

 

Bob Mueller Runs and Hides in Eight Minutes to Avoid Having to Answer One Key Question; By ROGER L. SIMON; PJ Media; 5/29/19

 

Limbaugh on Mueller Remarks: ‘Do You Realize What an Abomination of the Justice System That Is?’ By JEFF POOR; Breitbart; 5/29/19

 

Robert Mueller’s abuse of our legal system continues – He didn’t need to speak Wednesday; By Tom Del Beccaro; Fox News; 5/29/19

____________________

Mueller/Dem Horse-Pucky

John R. Houk

© May 30, 2019

___________________

Special Counsel Mueller Gives Final Back Stabbing To Trump In Press Briefing To Help Democrats

 

© 2019 NWV – All Rights Reserved

_________________________

Mueller: ‘I couldn’t find a Trump-Crime…so it’s Time to Impeach him!’

 

Content is Copyright 1997-2019 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2019 Canada Free Press.Com 

_____________________

Judicial Watch President Calls for Investigation Into Mueller

 

© 2016 TrumpTrainNews

________________________

DERSHOWITZ BLASTS MUELLER FOR ‘EXCEEDING HIS ROLE’

 

© Copyright 1997-2019. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.

___________________

Mueller Just Proved His Entire Operation Was A Political Hit Job That Trampled The Rule Of Law

 

Copyright © 2019 The Federalist, a wholly independent division of FDRLST Media, All Rights Reserved.

 

Is Dislike of POTUS an Impeachable Offense?


Clem DeWitt takes on the Leftists desiring to impeach President Trump for the constitutional violation of not liking POTUS. WAIT! There is NO such clause in the U.S. Constitution!

 

Constitutional Sections Regarding Impeachment

 

Article 1, Section 2, Clause 5

 

The House of Representatives shall chuse [sic] their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

 

Article 1, Section 3, Clauses 6 and 7

 

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried the Chief Justice shall preside; And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

 

Judgement in Cases of Impreachment [sic] shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgement and Punishment, according to Law.

 

Article 2, Section 4

 

The President, Vice President and all Civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

 

… There Is MORE Pertaining to the Judiciary (Impeachment Clauses; University of ChicagoThe Founders Constitution; © 1987)

 

Impeachment Clause Commentary:

 

 

 

 

DeWitt includes the Leftist mania of smearing Conservatives’ character to brainwash voters to hate.

 

Enjoy the read.

 

JRH 3/16/18

Please Support NCCR

********************

Is Dislike of POTUS an Impeachable Offense?

 

Discovered at PATRIOTS UNITED TO SAVE AMERICA (Facebook Secret Group)

By  Clem DeWitt

3/16/18 10:34am

 

Most Democrats and their reliable, compliant, obedient Brown Shirts that make up the bulk of the US press, are engaged in a relentless, bloodless coup against President Donald Trump, Constitutionally elected by We The People.

Before taking his Oath of Office, there were cries to Impeach Trump. Of course the Constitution’s ‘Impeachment clause’ only covers Officers of the Constitution, not those in waiting. On the Floor of the People’s House, Rep. Green, D-TX, has led a circus that offers Impeachment articles against Trump, articles that are not just outside the clause, they are particulars based on a dislike of Trump and nothing less, or more. The Framers, intellectually light years ahead of Trump’s detractors, did not include personal dislikes for removal from Office and this Republic is better for that wisdom. If Democrats should prevail by some bastardization of the clause, the Constitution would forever be subject to on-the-spot amendment, rendering it a catch all for someone’s pique, their angst, their politics.

Before the 2016 Election, daily we were treated to an accuser and another that followed the next day and the day after the next with complaints that Trump had engaged in sexual predation of a most unsavory nature. Led by Gloria Allred, a self-disgracing lawyer who listens for ambulance sirens, great theater was made public with Allred and an accuser complete with tears and tissues. After Trump was elected, the tears and tissues evaporated as quickly as did the accusers. (Lisa Bloom, Allred’s daughter, would highlight the sequel with her client offering a complaint against Judge Roy Moore, Republican Candidate from Alabama for the US Senate. Tears and tissues were followed by evaporation. Allred and Bloom make up the DNC’s Criminal Investigation Division when it comes to Snidely Whiplash Republicans)

Enter Stormy Daniels, latest darling of the Impeach Trump crowd. It should be noted that whatever might have taken place between Trump and Daniels took place before Trump became President. But, as steady as any drum beat, the Daniel’s story on most left leaning news organizations is front and center. In print, it is above the fold, in the visual world, it leads off so-called newscasts. To some minds vacant of understanding-knowing the Impeachment clause, Daniels is the Impeachable offense that can take Trump down.

“Asked on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” whether Daniels had ever been threatened with physical harm, Michael Avenatti (Daniel’s lawyer) succinctly replied, “Yes.” (THE HILL). Of course Avenatti would not entertain follow up questions, instead saying “people will have to tune in to ’60 Minutes’ on March 25,” when CBS is scheduled to air an interview with Daniels.” (Yep, CBS, the network that gave us Rather and Mapes, co-conspirators to bring down President George W. Bush) Will Avenatti reveal the nature of a physical threat made against Daniels and by whom? Or is this a page from the Allred-Bloom playbook of salaciousness fabricated by shadowy, evaporating accusers?

Stay tuned as this Kabuki Theater of The Absurd continues day after day after day and all because most Democrats and most in the US press dislike Trump to the point of seeking to upend the Constitution if necessary to take down Trump.

____________________

Title determined by the Editor from the text.

Edited by John R. Houk

 

© Clem DeWitt

Newbill Emails on Crooked Hillary 2nd Set


crooked-hillary-descriptors

Edited by John R. Houk

Posted November 6, 2016

 

This batch of emails focuses on Crooked Hillary. There is some email information on Donald Trump through the eyes of Left Wing detractors. Newbill examines a post from a Bernie Sanders supporter that calls Crooked Hillary an evil Neocon. I disagree with the appellation Neocon on Hillary Clinton. I explain my disagreement on the Neocon accusation and that Neoconservatism is not evil down below.

 

JRH 11/5/16

Please Support NCCR

**************

Trump needs to Identify this Person and use his Extreme ECO-Marxism to Label Hillary with an ANTI-Economic Growth vision

10/14/2016 11:18 AM

 

Trump can say this shows we are Out of Balance with how Obama and NOW Hillary want to Implement policies that will enable the People’s access to their Rights and Liberties!!!! There is No Way we can Have a Robust Economy that serves the people when these people want to OPPRESS access to our Resources with Extreme ECO-Marxism!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

We Must EXPOSE this Hillary Clinton Campaign Manager as the ECO-Marxist. [This ECO-Marxist represents] the People doing the Dirty work behind our Government’s Closed Doors that’s KILLING OUR LIBERTY!!!!!!!!!!

 

http://www.hcn.org/issues/47.9/john-podesta-legacy-maker     

 

…  It was 2014, and McCarthy, the head of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, was about to make her case for blocking the controversial Pebble gold mine planned for Alaska’s Bristol Bay watershed, home to one of the world’s most prolific salmon fisheries. …

 

But McCarthy also knew there would be a new player in the room. Longtime Democratic operative John Podesta, Bill Clinton’s former chief of staff, had just returned to the White House as counselor to Barack Obama. And Podesta had a reputation for bold conservation policy.

 

 

And 10 minutes into the conversation, Podesta broke in. He said that he and the president endorsed McCarthy’s plan, and then laid out exactly how the announcement would roll out. McCarthy left the room, dumbfounded and elated.

 

 

“Nobody in the 21st century in U.S. government has had the influence that he has had on public lands and climate change,” says Douglas Brinkley, a Rice University professor of history.

 

 

Podesta’s political philosophy was shaped by his time at Knox College, a small liberal arts school in Galesburg, Illinois, where he joined Vietnam War protests and civil rights demonstrations. His first major political experience involved working on the doomed 1972 presidential campaign of liberal Democrat George McGovern.

 

 

Podesta also understands how public lands can be leveraged to benefit his boss and political party. Toward the end of the Clinton administration, he supported Forest Service Chief Mike Dombeck’s proposal to permanently protect the remaining roadless areas on national forests from logging, mining, drilling and other development. …

 

… But as the point man for the many scandals that plagued the Clinton White House, he got a reputation for having an evil twin known as “Skippy,” who could be harsh and unusually direct. …

 

… in2001, Podesta and some colleagues decided to create a progressive think tank that would be tough enough to compete with those on the political right. They called it the Center for American Progress, and it grew into a revolving-door powerhouse that harnessed the intellectual and political capital of the academic, NGO, philanthropic and government communities, often shuttling people in and out of key positions in all these realms. … and today, it boasts a staff of 314 policy wonks, professors and writers.

 

“Democrats and progressives did not have an institution dedicated to thinking up policies and finding a way to move them into the public sphere,” … “We called it a think-and-do tank. …”

 

Liberal pundits and mainstream journalists have occasionally questioned Podesta about his think tank’s financial and policy ties to its energy, defense and pharmaceutical company funders. … Hansjörg Wyss, a billionaire businessman who, for two decades, has financed efforts to conserve public lands. Podesta’s financial White House disclosure showed he collected $87,000 in 2013, for consulting for the HJW Foundation, a Wyss philanthropy.  The conservative Daily Caller website accused Podesta of violating White House ethics rules for taking funds from Wyss and then pushing Obama’s proposal to expand the area off-limits to oil and gas drilling in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge …

 

Together, HJW and Wyss Foundation donated more than $5 million to the Center for American Progress between 2011 and 2013 … The article is pro-Podesta & pro-Eco-Marxist – I chose the info that demonstrates that (John Podesta: Legacy maker; By Elizabeth Shogren; High Country News; 3/25/15)

 

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/08/20/fbi-doj-launch-probe-firm-clinton-campaign-chairman-john-podesta/

 

The FBI and Justice Department have launched an investigation into whether the Podesta Group, the lobbying and public relations firm co-founded by Hillary Clinton presidential campaign chairman John Podesta, has any connections to alleged corruption that occurred in the administration of former President of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych.

 

 

The Podesta Group, run by John Podest’s [sic] brother Tony Podesta, was retained by the Russia-controlled firm UraniumOne in 2012, 2014, and 2015, to lobby Hillary Clinton’s State Department. The lobbying firm was paid a total of $180,000 according to public records.

 

 

As it was first detailed in the New York Times bestselling book Clinton CashUranium One — which hired the Podesta Group — is the firm that funneled millions to the Clinton Foundation as the Russian government gained ownership of the company.

 

 

According to the New York Times, Russian President Vladimir Putin had a “goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain.”

 

The Times reported last April:

 

As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.

 

“And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock,” the Times report said.

 

According to the Daily Caller, Uranium One “paid the Podesta Group $40,000 to lobby the State Department, the Senate, the National Park Service, and the National Security Council for ‘international mining projects,’ according to a July 20, 2012 filing.”

 

Distancing itself from the work it did for an organization with ties to Yanukovych’s pro-Russian regime, the Podesta group said it hired lawyers to READ ENTIRETY (FBI, DOJ launch Probe into Firm of Clinton Campaign Chairman John Podesta; By JEROME HUDSON; Breitbart; 8/20/16)

 

+++

These are the Weasels that have created Groper-gate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 10/14/2016 11:18 AM

 

The Enemy’s with-in!!!!!

 

Trump needs to go after these “So Called Biographers” with the “Hey Wayne Barrett, Gwenda Blair, Michael D’Antonio, Harry Hurt and Timothy O’Brien where’s your same Criticism of the Clintons, Bill on the Women Abuse side and Hillary on the Breaking All the Laws of the USA Side”???????????

 

 

This Guy and all these so-called Biographers of Trump need medication for their Bias-ism disease!!!!!!

 

http://www.michaeldantonio.net/ 

 

Drawing upon extensive and exclusive interviews with Trump and many of his family members, including all his adult children, D’Antonio presents the full story of a truly American icon, from his beginnings as a businessman to his stormy romantic life and his pursuit of power in its many forms. For all those who wonder — Just who is Donald Trump? – Never Enough supplies the answer. He is a promoter, builder, performer and politician who pursues success with a drive that borders on obsession and yet, has given him, almost everything he ever wanted.

 

Read More (Never Enough: Donald Trump and the Pursuit of Success; Book synopsis of author Michael D’Antonio; MichaelDantonio.net)

 

I watched this Guy this Morning on The MS Media paint the most disgusting image of Trump as a guy with a Pattern towards abusing Women!!!!! I would elevate this “Screen Writer” Michael D Antonio “up to the Level of” PORNO Propagandist!!!!!!

 

This one is awful:

 

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/10/donald-trump-2016-biographers-214350

 

Back in early March, Politico Magazine brought together five Donald Trump biographers for a conversation over lunch at Trump Tower. At the time, the country was just beginning to grapple with the reality that the presidential nominee from one of the two major American political parties stood a good chance of being a real estate mogul and entertainer. Wayne Barrett, Gwenda Blair, Michael D’Antonio, Harry Hurt and Timothy O’Brien knew him better than anybody, had studied him more than anybody, had written an aggregate 2,195 pages in books.
So much has happened over the past seven months: the crackpot conspiracy theories, the rageful late-night Twitter tirades, the surges and slides in the polls, an onslaught of investigative reporting that painted him as a racist, sexist, selfish, uncharitable, lying predator. So we thought it was time, especially in the wake of “grab them by the pussy,” for an emergency reconvening of the Trumpologists. [Blog Editor: “Trumpologists” in this case means Leftist MSM hit squad.]

 

He is, the biographers said, “profoundly narcissistic,” “willing to go to lengths we’ve never seen before in order to satisfy his ego”—and “a very dangerous man for the next three or four weeks.” And after that? “This time, it’s going to be a straight‑out loss on the biggest stage he’s ever been on,” one biographer predicted. And yet: “As long as he’s remembered, maybe it won’t matter to him.”

READ ENTIRETY if you desire to vomit (‘I Think He’s a Very Dangerous Man for the Next Three or Four Weeks’; By SUSAN B. GLASSER and MICHAEL KRUSE; Politico Magazine; 10/12/16)

These People, Like the Bill and Hillary Clinton & Co., are a Disease on FREEDOM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

+++

Hillary’s Shadow Government

10/18/2016 9:37 AM

 

Dear John, you need to Please talk about Hillary’s Shadow Government that the FBI refers to in this Investigation report and say this is why Washington does not work for the American People and Shields Hillary and themselves from the rule of LAW!

 

https://vault.fbi.gov/hillary-r.-clinton/hillary-r.-clinton-part-04-of-04/view (it’s on page 56)

 

vault-home-%e2%80%a2-hillary-r-clinton-%e2%80%a2-hillary-r-clinton-part-04-of-04-pg-56-screen-capture

Vault Home • Hillary R. Clinton • Hillary R. Clinton Part 04 of 04 – pg. 56 Screen Capture

+++++++++++

The Corruption exposed by Wikileaks about Hillary Clinton.

10/19/2016 3:42 PM

**************ATTENTION****************

Here is an EYE-OPENING summary of the corruption exposed by Wikileaks about Hillary Clinton.

 

http://www.thecsconservative.com/podestaemails/

 

Here is a summary of the corruption exposed by Wikileaks about Hillary Clinton.

 

John Podesta is Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign Chairman. Podesta previously served as Chief of Staff to President Bill Clinton and Counselor to President Barack Obama.

 

On October 7th, 2016, WikiLeaks publish thousands of emails belonging to Podesta’s private email archives. More emails were released in the days that followed. Below is a compilation of some of the most revealing and damaging emails discovered:

 

POLICY / POSITION

 

Transcripts from Hillary Clinton’s lucrative closed-door paid speeches delivered to elite financial firms and other special interests groups (which she has refused and failed to disclose to the public after much demand) have finally surfaced:

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/927 (See Attachment)

 

Clinton staff conspiring to stage ‘leaking’ of favorable excerpts from wall street speech, in efforts to calm down the public while leaving out more damaging parts:

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/8086#efmAYqAgR

 

Leaked private speech, Clinton: “You Need Both A Public And A Private Position”

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/927#efmAaQAdiFjUFkd

 

Leaked private speech, Clinton: “My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders”:

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/927#efmFjUFkd

 

Mocking environmentalists in private meeting with unions, Clinton: “I want to defend fracking.” Climate change environmentalists should “Get a life”:

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/9617 (See attachment)

Politico article

 

Leaked private speech transcript shows Clinton’s warm ties to Wall Street’s most powerful figures: Clinton: “There is such a bias against people who have led successful and/or complicated lives” The pressure on officials to sell or divest assets in order to serve, she added, had become “very onerous and unnecessary”:

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/927#efmDEMDKk

 

Leaked private speech to Goldman Sachs, Clinton: Wall street was only accountable for the financial crisis for political reasons. The blame placed on the United States banking system for the crisis “could have been avoided in terms of both misunderstanding and really politicizing what happened”:

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/927#efmA2YA5Q

 

Leaked private speech to Goldman Sachs, Clinton: I mean, right now, there are so many places in our country where the banks are not doing what they need to do because they’re scared of regulations, they’re scared of the other shoe dropping, they’re just plain scared, so credit is not flowing the way it needs to to restart economic growth.”

https://www.wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/11011

 

Leaked private speech, Clinton: US will “ring China with missile defense”:

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/927 (See attachment)

 

Hillary Clinton flipped her public position on TPP after her team discussed how she would be “eaten alive” by Labor:

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/8452#efmAH1APRA0NA5c

 

Clinton speechwriter: “We are trying to find a good way to leak her opposition to the pipeline without her having to actually say it”:

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/3855#efmAAGADH

FOREIGN AFFAIRS

 

Hillary admits Qatar & Saudi Arabia are funding ISIS:

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/3774#efmBA5BDe

 

Qatar gifts Bill Clinton $1,000,000 for his birthday:

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/8396#efmAEOAGW

 

Clinton’s advisors agree to take foreign lobbyists money: Clinton’s National Finance Director, Dennis Cheng: “how do we explain to people that we’ll take money from a corporate lobbyist but not them; that the Foundation takes $ from foreign govts but we now won’t”. Campaign manager Robby Mook responds: “I’m ok just taking the money and dealing with any attacks. Are you guys ok with that?”, “Take the money!!” – READ THE REST (Breaking News – Wikileaks Release Exposes Hillary Clinton Corruption; By Robert Z; The Common Sense Conservative; 10/17/16)

 

++++

Huma Abedin Admits to a $12 Million Dollar Pay-For-Play

10/20/2016 11:59 AM

 

Hillary’s top assistant Huma Abedin admits to a $12 million dollar pay-for-play from Morocco!

 

http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/day-debate-wikileaks-strikes-hillary-pay-to-play-shocking/#ixzz4Ne3uQoEu

 

We have always known that Hillary Clinton was for sale during her time at the State Department.

 

Many politicans [sic] try to do this, but Hillary’s corruption is so massive that it’s historic.

 

Now, just hours after the debate, WikiLeaks provided the smoking gun we’ve been waiting for. Hillary’s top assistant Huma Abedin admits to a $12 million dollary pay-for-play from Morocco!

 

This leaked email from the 13th batch of John Podesta’s hacked emails shows direct confirmation that a meeting was set up with Hillary Clinton, and it was paid for with that massive cash payoff:

wikileaks-huma-abedin-emailWikileaks Huma Abedin Email

 

And Hillary Clinton confirmed that the WikiLeaks emails are authentic last night during the debate:

 

 

Hillary Clinton can blame the Russians and foreign agents all she wants. The emails are real, and so is the criminal corruption. Hillary Clinton used the Secretary of State’s office to become obscenely wealthy, and she put America’s national security at risk repeatedly.

 

Hillary couldn’t apply for a job in the federal government because READ ENTIRETY (Day After Debate, WikiLeaks Strikes Hillary With The Most Shocking Leak of 2016! By Kosar; Political Insider; 10/20/16)

++++

Russia has already Bribed Hillary!!!!!

10/20/2016 11:01 PM

 

What Romney says WAS BEFORE WE HAS THE RESULTS FROM FBI Comey … and if Hillary Clinton has already COMPROMISED U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY. The First response by the FBI would be to act in the best Interest of the USA and the Market and divert from this conversation!!!!

 

http://hotair.com/archives/2015/04/24/romney-every-appearance-that-hillary-clinton-was-bribed-on-uranium-deal/

 

Mitt Romney made the argument around which everyone else danced yesterday after the New York Times exposed the UraniumOne deal and its principals’ big cash avalanche to the Clinton Foundation. The State Department’s approval of the deal under Hillary Clinton wasn’t just “undue influence,” and not “a poor choice of timing,” either. “It looks like bribery,” Romney told Hugh Hewitt last night:

 

VIDEO: Mitt Romney on Clinton foundation uranium payments: “It looks like bribery”

 

Posted by Hugh Hewitt Show

Published on Apr 23, 2015

 

Hugh Hewitt Interview w/ Mitt Romeny [sic]

 

READ THE REST (Romney: “Every Appearance That Hillary Clinton Was Bribed” On Uranium Deal; ED MORRISSEY; Hot Air; 4/24/16 10:01 am)

 

Hillary Clinton has already been Bribed, we just did not realize it until the Lawless FBI ran its course letting Hillary off so she could skate into the Oval Office and Pardon her and her cohorts!!!!!

 

http://www.bing.com/search?q=Hillary+Clinton+bribed+by+Russia+&qs=n&form=QBLH&pc=MOZO&pq=hillary+clinton+bribed+b&sc=0-24&sp=-1&sk=&cvid=45D62613D14A40A48C2FAF788F995258

 

[Blog Editor: Bing Search Link under the query “Hillary Clinton bribed by Russia”]

+++

Hillary has already been bribed

10/21/2016 7:05 AM

 

The FBI cover up through Lawless Means shows this:

 

What was the U.S. Asset that was used as the bribed is the Question?

 

http://hotair.com/archives/2015/04/24/romney-every-appearance-that-hillary-clinton-was-bribed-on-uranium-deal/

 

[Blog Editor: See above summary of the same link.]

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/dear-clinton-campaign-and-brian-fallon-stop-accusing_us_57fcab23e4b0d786aa52bcaa?

 

Brian Fallon recently accused WikiLeaks of working on behalf of the Russian government to help Donald Trump. Fallon’s Twitter barrage was full of accusations against the whistleblowing organization, including an ironic plea for WikiLeaks to disclose Trump’s tax returns. Unfortunately, Hillary Clinton and her campaign have engaged in Cold War-era propaganda, primarily to deflect from numerous cyber-attacks. There’s also the tiny issue of 20% of U.S. uranium sold to the Russian government from a company run by Clinton Foundation donors.

 

Thus far, WikiLeaks, DC LeaksGuccifer 2.0, and apparently “Russian hackers” have managed to hack into computer networks associated with the Democratic Party. Rather than assess why these various cyber-attacks have taken place, Brian Fallon, Robby Mook, and others in the Clinton campaign have leveled baseless accusations against WikiLeaks and Russia. U.S. intelligence officials might believe Russia is involved with the leaks, but have yet to disclose any evidence READ THE REST (Dear Clinton Campaign and Brian Fallon, Stop Accusing WikiLeaks of Working for Russia; By H. A. Goodman; Huffington Post; 10/11/16 05:27 am ET)

 

Look at the Credits in this video, it is HUGE!!!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAM48bmtMDc

 

VIDEO: NEW CLINTON EMAIL SCANDAL: State Dept Bribed FBI To Protect Hillary From Espionage Act Indictment

 

Posted by H. A. Goodman

Published on Oct 16, 2016

 

My name is H. A. Goodman and I’m an author, columnist, and journalist www.hagoodman.com
Dear Clinton Campaign and Brian Fallon, Stop Accusing WikiLeaks of Working for Russia:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/dear-clinton-campaign-and-brian-fallon-stop-accusing_us_57fcab23e4b0d786aa52bcaa

 

New FBI files contain allegations of ‘quid pro quo’ in Clinton’s emails:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/10/15/new-fbi-files-contain-allegations-quid-pro-quo-in-clintons-emails.html
PODESTA 9 JUST RELEASED! https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/787625546461175808
WikiLeaks releases transcripts of Hillary Clinton Goldman Sachs speeches:

 

http://myfox8.com/2016/10/15/wikileaks-releases-transcripts-of-hillary-clinton-goldman-sachs-speeches/
Subpoena: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6391

 

FAKE CRAIGLIST: https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/12803
Podesta Suggested Coordinating With State Dept. To ‘Hold’ Hillary’s Emails With Obama:
http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/14/podesta-suggested-coordinating-with-state-dept-to-hold-hillarys-emails-with-obama/

 

READ THE REST

 

If Hillary has already been bribed whatever was bribed is grounds for Impeachment as this article shows.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/439715/impeach-hillary-clinton-congress-has-power-do-it

 

For months, I have been arguing that Hillary Clinton should be impeached. It is all well and good to prosecute a former government official for any crimes she has committed. Indeed, the Constitution expressly provides for criminal prosecution in addition to impeachment. Nevertheless, for the Framers — and, if we had common sense, for us — the imperative was to deprive a corrupt person of any further opportunity to abuse government power. Whether the official should also be convicted and sent to prison was not unimportant but, in the greater scheme of things, decidedly secondary.

Interestingly, the main pushback I received upon positing this argument was not that Mrs. Clinton is undeserving of impeachment. That, of course, is a measure of the seriousness of her high crimes and misdemeanors: the e-mail scandal; the reckless mishandling of classified information that has surely exposed our national-defense secrets to hostile powers; the mass destruction of thousands of government records after Congress asked for them; the obstruction of government investigations; the serial lies to Congress and the public; the shocking failure to provide security for Americans stationed in Benghazi and the failure to attempt to rescue them during a terrorist siege; the lies to the American people and to the families of murdered American officials about the cause of the attack; the trumping up of a prosecution against the video producer scapegoated for the Benghazi attack; the Clinton Foundation corruption involving the sale of influence for donations, the favors done for shady benefactors at the expense of national security, and the use of the State Department as an arm of the Clinton pay-to-play enterprise.

 

… How could she be removed from an office she does not hold based on offenses not committed while wielding presidential power?

These questions and the non-incumbency theory behind them fundamentally misconstrue the constitutional remedy of impeachment, which is not limited to removal from power but includes disqualification from future office. Moreover, their premise is wrong: The proceeding against Clinton would not be a presidential impeachment; it would be an impeachment based on her abuses of power as secretary of state, which would have the constitutional effect of disqualifying her for the presidency.

… Article I endows the House of Representatives with the “sole Power of Impeachment” — i.e., the power to file articles of impeachment. It further empowers the Senate with “the sole Power to try all Impeachments.” Significantly, in prescribing the standard for conviction in the Senate, Article I, Section 3 states that “no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two-thirds of the Members present” (emphasis added).

 

Note carefully: The Constitution does not say the impeached person must be a current officeholder. As we shall see, that makes perfect sense: The point of impeachment is to deny power to any person — not necessarily an incumbent official — whose high crimes and misdemeanors have demonstrated unfitness for a high public trust.

 

The constitutional standard for impeachment also elucidates that incumbency is not necessary. The standard, prescribed by Article II, Section 4, is the commission of “Treason, Bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” Obviously, one need not be in office to commit treason or bribery; but if one has at any time committed these heinous offenses, one is unsuitable for public office. The same is true, by definition, of “high crimes and misdemeanors,” a term of READ ENTIRETY (Impeach Clinton to Bar Her from Holding Federal Office. It’s Constitutional; By ANDREW C. MCCARTHY; National Review; 9/6/16 4:00 AM)

+++

Hillary Clinton: Oliver Stone & U.S. Foreign Policy ‘Elite’

10/21/2016 9:02 AM

 

Oliver Stone has penned a powerful and emotional takedown of Hillary Clinton

https://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2016/03/31/were-going-to-war-oliver-stone-opines-on-the-dangerous-extremism-of-neocon-hillary-clinton/

 

 

Oliver Stone has penned a powerful and emotional takedown of Hillary Clinton, focusing on her insane neocon foreign policy chops in a piece published in the Huffington Post titled, Why I’m for Bernie Sanders.

 

What follows are just a few paragraphs, I suggest reading the entire thing:

 

We’re going to war — either hybrid in nature to break the Russian state back to its 1990s subordination, or a hot war (which will destroy our country). Our citizens should know this, but they don’t because our media is dumbed down in its “Pravda”-like support for our “respectable,” highly aggressive government. We are being led, as C. Wright Mills said in the 1950s, by a government full of “crackpot realists: in the name of realism they’ve constructed a paranoid reality all their own.” Our media has credited Hillary Clinton with wonderful foreign policy experience, unlike Trump, without really noting the results of her power-mongering. She’s comparable to Bill Clinton’s choice of Cold War crackpot Madeleine Albright as one of the worst Secretary of States we’ve had since … Condi Rice? Albright boasted, “If we have to use force it is because we are America; we are the indispensable nation. We stand tall and we see further than other countries into the future.”

Hillary’s record includes supporting the barbaric “contras” against the Nicaraguan people in the 1980s, supporting the NATO bombing of the former Yugoslavia, supporting the ongoing Bush-Iraq War, the ongoing Afghan mess, and as Secretary of State the destruction of the secular state of Libya, the military coup in Honduras, and the … You can read the rest of this Leftist rant if you choose (“We’re Going to War” – Oliver Stone Opines on the Dangerous Extremism of Neocon Hillary Clinton; By Michael Krieger; Liberty BlitzKrieg; 3/31/16 12:01 pm)

 

***[Blog Editor: I disagree with Mr. Krieger that Crooked Hillary is a Neocon. Part of that disagreement is because I believe the venom and vitriol against Neoconservatism is based on erroneous perceptions from both sides of the political aisle. Did Neocons make some bad decisions after 911? It turns they did. However, at the time the concept of throwing despotic leadership to give people a more democratic representative choice was a valid objective. The reason is history has shown people are given a voting representative choice their government tends toward more individual freedom. Examples are post-WWII Germany and Japan. Both those nations developed into solid allies of America according to the needs of U.S. National Interests. The thing Neocons didn’t count on is Islamic culture which is totally contrary to Western Liberty, especially in the USA. Islam by nature is intolerant and despotic of any individual choice that might run counter to Islamic tenets. Muslims for the most part concur with their faith of intolerance. This Muslim intolerance will factor into a mutual National Interest benefiting the USA or a Muslim nation. The Neocon failure was finding this out the hard way. The Neoconservative key is a foreign policy that validates U.S. National Interests, keeps America strong and keeps America Exceptional. NONE OF WHICH is of interest to Crooked Hillary (falsely accused of Neoconservatism) or to uber-Leftist Bernie Sanders who author Michael Krieger has endorsed]***

 

U.S. Foreign Policy ‘Elite’ Eagerly Await an Expansion of Overseas Wars Under Hillary Clinton

http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2016/10/20/u-s-foreign-policy-elite-eagerly-await-an-expansion-of-overseas-wars-under-hillary-clinton/#comment-114647

 

Comment 114647 is Tony Newbill

N3angus — October 21, 2016 at 7:22 am

 

Facebook has blocked me from public comment posting of this, Hillary has already been bribed.

 

The FBI cover up through Lawless Means shows this.

 

What was the US Asset that was used as the bribed is the Question?

 

http://hotair.com/archives/2015/04/24/romney-every-appearance-that-hillary-clinton-was-bribed-on-uranium-deal/

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/dear-clinton-campaign-and-brian-fallon-stop-accusing_us_57fcab23e4b0d786aa52bcaa?

 

My name is H. A. Goodman and I’m an author, columnist, and
journalist http://www.hagoodman.com

 

Dear Clinton Campaign and Brian Fallon, Stop Accusing WikiLeaks of Working for Russia. Look at the Credits in this video, it is HUGE!!!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAM48bmtMDc

 

If Hillary has already been bribed whatever was bribed is grounds for Impeachment as this article shows:

 

For months, I have been arguing that Hillary Clinton should be impeached.

 

Read more at:
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/439715/impeach-hillary-clinton-congress-has-power-do-it

 

[Blog Editor: This comment is covered above in a Newbill email.]

_________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Any text or links enclosed by brackets are by the Editor.

 

© Tony Newbill

 

DEMS WARN BACKERS: OBAMA COULD GO TO PRISON!


Save as Inmate Obama

Former Tea Party GOP candidate for Senator from Alaska has caught the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) fear mongering to their constituents that the Republicans desire to impeach President Obama and throw him in the slammer. If only it was true.

 

From what have read it is only committed Tea Party Republicans that would go with the impeachment process. The politicians still running the GOP agenda are too concerned about political fallout to do the right thing and impeach Obama followed by a Senate conviction that would actually open the door for Federal prosecution of America’s criminal President.

 

Miller believes the DCCC impeachment fear mongering is merely a fundraising tactic. I pray the Republicans turn a Dem fund raising tactic into a self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

JRH 11/24/14

Please Support NCCR

******************************

DEMS WARN BACKERS: OBAMA COULD GO TO PRISON!

‘Republicans think this is their chance to destroy the president’

DREW ZAHN

November 23, 2014 4:30 PM

WND

 

A mass email from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Sunday tried to drum up support by warning President Obama is in danger of impeachment, or even worse, jail time.

The email – with subject line “Impeachment? Prison??? – Sign now, stand with President Obama” – claims Obama “took bold, courageous action this week to fix our nation’s broken immigration system,” but now is “under attack.”

 

“Republicans think this is their chance to destroy the president,” the email reads. “They’re threatening lawsuits, shutdowns, impeachment? One Republican congressman even suggested President Obama be thrown in jail!”

 

The DCCC then implores Democrats to show they’re “still standing with President Obama” and “have his back” by signing an online petition.

 

Former Alaskan GOP Senate Candidate Joe Miller noticed the email and posted it on his blog, “Restoring Liberty”:

 

Screen capture of email sent from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee

Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Screenshot Photo - BHO Jail

“Apparently, members of the president’s party are facing some pretty serious heat over King Obama’s unconstitutional power grab this week,” Miller quipped. “Appeals to the president’s support base seem to be growing in their hysteria.”

 

Miller continued: “Given the fact that most Americans do not support Obama’s power grab, and even members of his own party disapprove, impeachment should be on the table.

 

“Regrettably, it’s not,” Miller commented. “Fresh out of overwhelming mid-term victories, the GOP is once again moving tepidly. Even on the issue that arguably provided their margin of success – Obamacare – leadership has stated that a vote on repeal will not even be held.

 

“So the DCCC’s hysteria over impeachment and jail time is just a fundraising gimmick,” Miller concluded. “They know, as do all Washington insiders, that the ruling class will ensure continuation of the status quo. And absent another Jacksonian or Reagan revolution, we’ll continue our slide into the dustbin of history.”

 

The mention of jail time, however, wasn’t merely invented.

 

As WND reported, Rep. Mo Brooks, R-Ala., did suggest before Obama’s speech about his executive action on immigration that the president may be about to commit a felony worthy of five years jail time.

 

He told Slate that with his forthcoming executive actions on immigration, President Obama risked breaking a federal statute “making it a felony to aid, abet or entice a foreigner to illegally enter the U.S.”

 

Said Brooks: “At some point, you have to evaluate whether the president’s conduct aids or abets, encourages or entices foreigners to unlawfully cross into the United States of America. That has a five-year in-jail penalty associated with it.”

__________________________

Drew Zahn is a WND news editor who cut his journalist teeth as a member of the award-winning staff of Leadership, Christianity Today’s professional journal for church leaders. A former pastor, he is the editor of seven books, including Movie-Based Illustrations for Preaching & Teaching, which sparked his ongoing love affair with film and his weekly WND column, “Popcorn and a (world)view.”

 

© Copyright 1997-2014. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.

Cruz, Lee Threaten ‘Procedural’ War on Senate Floor to Stop ‘Lawless Amnesty’


Senators Mile Lee - Ted Cruz AP Photo

Six U.S. Senators have placed outgoing (i.e. lame duck) – Majority Leader Senator Reid – on noticed that if President Barack Hussein Obama unilaterally forces an illegal alien amnesty edict, that audacious Presidential act will cause a constitutional crisis. It is the belief of the Senators (Original Intent) that immigration law is solely the purview of the Congress.

 

Since I agree with those six Senators, Obama illegal Alien Amnesty should be another nail to the coffin of impeachment. God knows many of those nails have already been hammered but political numbers, political correctness, and a cowardly GOP leadership have FAILED to move the coffin from the House to the Senate.

 

JRH 11/6/14

Please Support NCCR

********************************

Cruz, Lee Threaten ‘Procedural’ War on Senate Floor to Stop ‘Lawless Amnesty’

 

By Terence P. Jeffrey

November 5, 2014 – 3:43 PM

CNSNews.com

 

Republican Senators Ted Cruz of Texas, Mike Lee of Utah, Jeff Sessions of Alabama, Pat Roberts of Kansas, Mike Crapo of Idaho, and David Vitter of Louisiana sent a letter to lame-duck Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada today saying that if President Obama takes unilateral action to grant amnesty to illegal aliens it “will create a constitutional crisis.”

 

The senators told Reid that they would assist him in enacting a measure to stop Obama from unilaterally granting an amnesty, but that if Reid lets Obama go forward with such an amnesty they “would use all procedural means necessary” to make the Senate focus on the constitutional crisis they say that this “lawless amnesty” would create.

 

On Dec. 11, the continuing resolution now funding the government will expire. Before that date, both Houses of Congress will need to approve a new continuing resolution to fund the government beyond that date.

 

If the CR does not permit the Executive Branch to spend money on some action, the Executive Branch cannot take that action.

 

“We write to express our alarm with President Obama’s announced intention to take unilateral executive action by the end of this year to lawlessly grant amnesty to immigrants who have entered the country illegally,” the senators wrote Reid.

 

“The Supreme Court has recognized that ‘over no conceivable subject is the power of Congress more complete’ than its power over immigration,” the senators said. “Therefore, President Obama will be exercising powers properly belonging to Congress if he makes good his threat.

 

“This will create a constitutional crisis that demands action by Congress to restore the separation of powers,” the senators told Reid.

 

“As majority leader of the Senate, you have the responsibility of not only representing the citizens of your state, but also of protecting the Constitution through vigilant exercise of the checks and balances provided under the Constitution,” wrote Cruz, Lee, Sessions, Roberts, Crapo and Vitter.

 

“Therefore, we write to offer our full assistance in ensuring expeditious Senate debate and passage for a measure that preserves the power of Congress by blocking any action the president may take to violate the Constitution and unilaterally grant amnesty,” the senators said.

 

“[H]owever,” they continued, “should you decline to defend the Senate and the Constitution from executive overreach, the undersigned senators will use all procedural means necessary to return the Senate’s focus during the lame duck session to resolving the constitutional crisis created by President Obama’s lawless amnesty.”

__________________________________

All original CNSNews.com material, copyright 1998-2014. Cybercast News Service.

 

About CNSNews.com

 

CNSNews.com was launched on June 16, 1998 as a news source for individuals, news organizations and broadcasters who put a higher premium on balance than spin and seek news that’s ignored or under-reported as a result of media bias by omission.

 

Study after study by the Media Research Center, the parent organization of CNSNews.com, clearly demonstrate a liberal bias in many news outlets – bias by commission and bias by omission – that results in a frequent double-standard in editorial decisions on what constitutes “news.”

 

In response to these shortcomings, MRC Chairman L. Brent Bozell III founded CNSNews.com in an effort to provide an alternative news source that would cover stories that are subject to the bias of omission and report on other news subject to bias by commission.

 

CNSNews.com endeavors to READ THE REST

 

When Allen West Speaks – Believe It


Allen West

 

John R. Houk

© August 15, 2014

 

Lt. Col. Allen West lost his reelection bid as a House Representative in Florida District 18 by a combination of gerrymandering and voter fraud (Liberal Admission and Conservative View) in 2012.

 

Of course before entering politics in 2010, West was a Lieutenant Colonel in U.S. Army fighting Islamic terrorists in Iraq. West was a decorated Army hero treated shabbily and unjustly by the U.S. Army largely due to a Left Wing cancerous disease of political correctness.

 

The short version of an incident that then Lt. Col. West became directly involved with was some enhanced interrogation of a captured Islamic terrorist that was proven had knowledge of an assassination attempt on West and an ambush against his soldiers. West was essentially drummed out of the Army for this enhanced interrogation technique that led to the capture of terrorist insurgents sparing the lives of his soldiers from that plan.

 

Here is the long version courtesy of FrontPageMag.com in a write-up of the online news service’s 2004 Man of the Year:

 

 

… He knew only too well of the terrorist attacks carried out by Saddam loyalists and recently arrived jihadist fanatics, claiming an average of one U.S. soldier’s life each day. With a firm commitment to protect his soldiers’ well-being, he determined to keep his troops safe.

 

In late August, Colonel West received news that his men had been targeted by a group of thugs associated with an Iraqi policeman named Yahya Jhodri Hamoodi. Allied forces quickly apprehended Hamoodi in Saba al Boor, a tiny town near Tikrit. Four interrogation specialists worked late into the evening of August 20, desperately trying to pry the attack plans out of him. Growing frustrated, the interrogators resorted to physical force, punching Hamoodi – without success. (Hamoodi was not seriously injured at any point during the interrogation.) It was then that Col. Allen West intervened.

 

Seeing that even physical violence had proven ineffective, Colonel West took the next logical step: He took the intransigent suspect outside, shoved Hamoodi’s head into a sandbox and threatened to kill him. The Colonel then pulled out his sidearm and fired a warning shot into the sky. Then West carefully held Hamoodi’s head aside as he fired a shot over Hamoodi’s shoulder, into the warm Iraqi sand burying his visage.

 

That near-scrape with death did the trick. Hamoodi began singing, telling West the identities of two men planning the attacks and revealing their attack plans, including the site of the intended ambush. The two men were arrested, and Colonel West ordered his men away from the site as they continued to serve the liberated Iraqi people. Upon turning Hamoodi over, he admitted his unorthodox tactics. For protecting the 700 soldiers in his care and cracking Hamoodi where professional interrogators had failed, Colonel West was immediately stripped of his command and threatened with jail time.

 

 

On December 11, West escaped court martial. Major General Raymond Odierno ordered West to pay a $5,000 fine and allowed him to retire as a Lieutenant Colonel. The ordeal caused by his desire to save his troops a violent death in a desert land had finally ended. He was free to return to Ft. Hood, Texas, to his wife Angela, with his reputation essentially cleared.

 

READ ENTIRETY (FrontPage Magazine’s Man of the Year: Col. Allen B. West; By Ben Johnson; FrontPageMag.com; 1/2/04)

 

You can read Allen West’s own account at the Washington Times.

 

I had entered into hero worship of Allen West before he entered politics of his heroic actions to protect his troops and hunt down Islamic terrorists. Did I say “hero worship”? Well, get over it if you are a Leftist.

 

So anyway I am a supporter of Allen West because I trust his decisions and his patriotism. Recently West called President Obama an Islamist because of his presidential decisions that tend to favor the Muslim world’s narrative about America and Israel.

 

I am going to cross post that article below, but before I do I feel the need to qualify West’s strong words describing President Barack Hussein Obama.

 

There will be Leftists and those that favor a counterjihad approach to exposing Islam that will read something into the “Islamist” label that West did not mean. The Left will call West an Islamophobe bigot and counterjihad amateurs will jump in glee for exposing BHO as a closet Muslim.

 

Allen West did not call President Obama a Muslim. West affirmed that Obama’s actions shows all the evidence of Islamist enemies of America hence West called the President an Islamist.

 

Personally I am convinced Obama is a largely irreligious Leftist that has embraced the political strategy of using radical Islam as a tool to accomplish a Leftist agenda which would produce the Leftist utopia government control of people, their customs and their societal life.

 

Below is Matthew Burke’s news piece posted on TPNN bi-lined with Allen West calling Obama an Islamist.

 

JRH 8/16/14

Please Support NCCR

***************************

Allen West: ‘Barack Hussein Obama is an Islamist’

 

By Matthew Burke

August 14, 2014

Tea Party News Network

 

Former congressman, Lt. Col. Allen West proclaimed on Wednesday that there is only one true explanation that Obama is “purposely enabling the Islamist cause.”

 

West, a favorite among many in the pro-freedom, pro-Constitution Tea Party movement, listed six instances where the Obama regime has been “working counter to the security of the United States of America”:

 

1. The unilateral release of five senior Taliban back to the enemy while the enemy is still fighting us.

 

2. Providing weapons of support to the Muslim Brotherhood-led Egyptian government — F-16s and M1A1 Abrams tanks — but not to the Egyptian government after the Islamist group has been removed.

 

3. Negotiations with Qatar and Turkey, two Islamist-supporting countries.

 

4. Negotiations with Hamas, a terrorist group.

 

5. Returning sanction money, to the tune of billions of dollars, back to the theocratic regime led by Iran’s ayatollahs and allowing them to march on towards nuclear capability.

6. Obama’s evident support of Islamists in Libya.

 

Along with the above, West cited the recent report that Obama has lifted longtime restrictions against Libyans attending flight schools and receiving nuclear science training in the U.S, only two years after the terrorism that took place in Benghazi, Libya.

There is only one logical reason for the Democrat president to make these anti-American decisions, West concluded Wednesday on his website, that there is no other reason why Obama would prop-up America’s enemies:

 

Sorry, but I can only explain this one way: Barack Hussein Obama is an Islamist in his foreign policy perspectives and supports their cause. You can go back and listen to his 2009 speech in Cairo, where Muslim Brotherhood associates were seated front and center.

All the circumstantial and anecdotal evidence points to that conclusion. The pivot away from the Middle East seems to be nothing more than an opportunity to enable Islamists and their goals. Anyone supporting this Libyan ban being lifted is indeed an enemy of this state.

 

In June, the former congressman from Florida called for Obama’s impeachment, following Obama’s negotiation with terrorists, releasing military deserter Bowe Bergdahl in exchange for the U.S. release of five notorious Muslim terrorists from GITMO.

Barack Obama’s longtime pastor for over two decades, Jeremiah Wright, told author Ed Klein two years ago that “Barack Obama was steeped in Islam” and that he “knew very little about Christianity.”

 

“When I asked the Reverend Wright about this whole question of Islam and Christianity. He said, well, you know, Barack Obama was steeped in Islam. He knew a lot about Islam from his childhood. But he knew very little about Christianity. And I made it easy for him to feel not guilty about learning about Christianity without turning his back on his Islamic friends.”

 

________________________________

When Allen West Speaks – Believe It

John R. Houk

© August 15, 2014

__________________________________

Allen West: ‘Barack Hussein Obama is an Islamist’

 

Matthew Burke is a former Financial Advisor/Planner for 24 years. He was a 2010 Constitutional Conservative candidate for U.S. Congress in Washington State. View all Posts by Matthew Burke

 

Copyright © 2014 TPNN · TEA PARTY NEWS NETWORK · ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

The House should Investigate and Subpoena Obama Administration to the Hilt


BHO calls scandals - Americans Call Crimes

John R. Houk

© June 15, 2014

 

In a recent Conservative Campaign Committee (CCC) fundraising email I discovered even more SMOKING GUN evidence that the entirety of the Obama Administration conspired to lie about the Benghazi attack to American voters for political reasons. The CCC email doesn’t harp on the political reasons as I think it should. You have to realize the political reasons were to ensure the reelection of Comrade Obama as the President of the United States of America in November 2012. The Benghazi Islamic terrorist attack on the diplomatic annex was a planned attack on September 11, 2012. Obama tried to make that attack appear to voters that the Islamic terrorist attack in Benghazi was a spontaneous motivated riot due to a sophomoric made Youtube video produced in America that was designed to be provocatively racist against Islam.

 

If you have ever gotten to see what is billed as a Youtube trailer before it was yanked you know the video is so poorly made that it is almost humorous. Unfortunately Free Speech in Islam’s Sharia Law is blasphemous so it is true Muslims were offended. SO WHAT! The Obama Administration has forced American Christians to participate in so many offensive measures from killing unborn lives (taxpayer supported abortions), forcing Christian Hospitals to perform abortions on demand, to force businesses owned by Christians to cater to the service needs of homosexuals even though that lifestyle is an oft repeated abomination to the Presence of God in the Holy Bible and more.

 

Christian Rights are vacated in the name multicultural acceptance. Christians are forced to absorb the mirth of atheistic Leftists and abortionists, Muslims spewing hate toward Christians (See Also HERE), homosexuals spewing hate toward Biblical Christians and more.

 

AND YET when a Christian or Counterjihad writer exposes what the actual Quran, Hadith and Sira of Islam do proclaim, it is called hate-speech or bigoted Islamophobia! (See Also HERE and HERE)

 

I have no doubts that the Obama Administration tried to both assuage Muslims and fool American voters that his Presidency is totally supportive of a Muslim’s right to go crazy due to multicultural deference.

 

Is lying to voters to gain an election victory a crime in the USA?

 

This is not just executive overreach. In many cases, Obama’s exercise of authoritarian power is criminal. His executive branch is responsible for violations of the Arms Export Control Act in shipping weapons to Syria, the Espionage Act in Libya, and IRS law with regard to the targeting of conservative groups. His executive branch is guilty of involuntary manslaughter in Benghazi and in the Fast and Furious scandal, and bribery in its allocation of waivers in Obamacare and tax dollars in its stimulus spending. His administration is guilty of obstruction of justice and witness tampering.

 

And yet nothing is done. (Prosecute the President; By Ben Shapiro; FrontPage Mag; 6/12/14)

 

That excerpt above lists only a fraction of the legal infractions committed either by President Obama’s direction and/or Obama’s Executive Branch. And there is no criminal investigations! Why?

 

PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY FROM JUDICIAL DIRECTION

 

By the decision of the Court in Mississippi v. Johnson,720 in 1867, the President was placed beyond the reach of judicial direction, either affirmative or restraining, in the exercise of his powers, whether constitutional or statutory, political or otherwise, save perhaps for what must be a small class of powers that are purely ministerial.721 An application for an injunction to forbid President Johnson to enforce the Reconstruction Acts, on the ground of their unconstitutionality, was answered by Attorney General Stanberg, who argued, inter alia, the absolute immunity of the President from judicial process.722 The Court refused to permit the filing, using language construable as meaning that the President was not reachable by judicial process but which more fully paraded the horrible consequences were the Court to act. First noting the limited meaning of the term “ministerial,” the Court observed that “[v]ery different is the duty of the President in the exercise of the power to see that the laws are faithfully executed, and among these laws the acts named in the bill. . . . The duty thus imposed on the President is in no just sense ministerial. It is purely executive and political.

 

“An attempt on the part of the judicial department of the government to enforce the performance of such duties by the President might be justly characterized, in the language of Chief Justice Marshall, as ‘an absurd and excessive extravagance.’

 

 

Rare has been the opportunity for the Court to elucidate its opinion in Mississippi v. Johnson, and, in the Watergate tapes case,724 it held the President amenable to subpoena to produce evidence for use in a criminal case without dealing, except obliquely,[p.580]with its prior opinion. The President’s counsel had argued the President was immune to judicial process, claiming “that the independence of the Executive Branch within its own sphere . . . insulates a President from a judicial subpoena in an ongoing criminal prosecution, and thereby protects confidential Presidential communications.”725 However, the Court held, “neither the doctrine of separation of powers, nor the need for confidentiality of high–level communications, without more, can sustain an absolute, unqualified Presidential privilege of immunity from judicial process under all circumstances.”726 The primary constitutional duty of the courts “to do justice in criminal prosecutions” was a critical counterbalance to the claim of presidential immunity and to accept the President’s argument would disturb the separation–of–powers function of achieving “a workable government” as well as “gravely impair the role of the courts under Art. III.”727

 

Present throughout the Watergate crisis, and unresolved by it, was the question of the amenability of the President to criminal prosecution prior to conviction upon impeachment.728 It was argued that the impeachment clause necessarily required indictment and trial in a criminal proceeding to follow a successful impeachment and that a President in any event was uniquely immune from indictment, and these arguments were advanced as one ground to deny enforcement of the subpoenas running to the President.729 Assertion of the same argument by Vice President Agnew was controverted by the Government, through the Solicitor General, but, as to the President, it was argued that for a number of constitutional [p.581]and practical reasons he was not subject to ordinary criminal process.730

 

Finally, most recently, the Court has definitively resolved one of the intertwined issues of presidential accountability. The President is absolutely immune in actions for civil damages for all acts within the “outer perimeter” of his official duties.731 The Court’s close decision was premised on the President’s “unique position in the constitutional scheme,” that is, it was derived from the Court’s inquiry of a “kind of ‘public policy’ analysis” of the “policies and principles that may be considered implicit in the nature of the President’s office in a system structured to achieve effective government under a constitutionally mandated separation of powers.”732 … Although the Court relied in part upon its previous practice of finding immunity for officers, such as judges, as to whom the Constitution is silent, although a long common–law history exists, and in part upon historical evidence, which it admitted was fragmentary and ambiguous,734 the Court’s principal focus was upon the fact that the President was distinguishable from all other executive officials. He is charged with a long list of “supervisory and policy responsibilities of utmost discretion and sensitivity,”735 and diversion of his energies by concerns with private lawsuits would “raise unique risks to the effective functioning of government.”736

 

Supplement: [P. 582, add to text following n.738:]

 

Unofficial Conduct.—In Clinton v. Jones,9 the Court, in a case of first impression, held that the President did not have qualified immunity from suit for conduct alleged to have taken place prior to his election to the Presidency, which would entitle him to delay of both the trial and discovery. The Court held that its precedents affording the President immunity from suit for his official conduct—primarily on the basis that he should be enabled to perform his duties effectively without fear that a particular decision might give rise to personal liability— were inapplicable in this kind of case. Moreover, the separation–of–powers doctrine did not require a stay of all private actions against the President. Separation of powers is preserved by guarding against the encroachment or aggrandizement of one of the coequal branches of the Government at the expense of another. However, a federal trial court tending to a civil suit in which the President is a party performs only its judicial function, not a function of another branch. No decision by a trial court could curtail the scope of the President’s powers. The trial court, the Supreme Court observed, had sufficient powers to accommodate the President’s schedule and his workload, so as not to impede the President’s performance of his duties. Finally, the Court stated its belief that allowing such suits to proceed would not generate a large volume of politically motivated harassing and frivolous litigation. Congress has the power, the Court advised, if it should think necessary to legislate, to afford the President protection.10 (CRS ANNOTATED CONSTITUTION: Article II — Table of Contents; From Cornel University Law School, Legal information Institute)

 

Sifting through the legalese I am assuming that means the POTUS cannot be prosecuted for a crime but can be subject to a civil suit as long as it does not interfere with his Executive Branch duties. After his term of Office has expired then he may be subject to criminal proceedings. This is the unofficial reason President Gerald Ford gave President Richard Milhous Nixon a full pardon from any crimes committed while in Office. A sitting President that breaks the law can receive the equivalent of a political indictment called impeachment in the House of Representatives. The Senate acts as the equivalent of a political jury with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court acting as Judge. A Senate conviction ONLY means a removal from Office. Then criminal proceedings can be executed judicially.

 

High Crimes and Misdemeanors

 

The U.S. Constitution provides impeachment as the method for removing the president, vice president, federal judges, and other federal officials from office. The impeachment process begins in the House of Representatives and follows these steps:

 

1.      The House Judiciary Committee holds hearings and, if necessary, prepares articles of impeachment. These are the charges against the official.

 

2.      If a majority of the committee votes to approve the articles, the whole House debates and votes on them.

 

3.      If a majority of the House votes to impeach the official on any article, then the official must then stand trial in the Senate.

 

4.      For the official to be removed from office, two-thirds of the Senate must vote to convict the official. Upon conviction, the official is automatically removed from office and, if the Senate so decides, may be forbidden from holding governmental office again.

 

 

The impeachment process is political in nature, not criminal. Congress has no power to impose criminal penalties on impeached officials. But criminal courts may try and punish officials if they have committed crimes.

 

The Constitution sets specific grounds for impeachment. They are “treason, bribery, and other high crimes and misdemeanors.” To be impeached and removed from office, the House and Senate must find that the official committed one of these acts.

 

The Constitution defines treason in Article 3, Section 3, Clause 1:

 

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

 

The Constitution does not define bribery. It is a crime that has long existed in English and American common law. It takes place when a person gives an official money or gifts to influence the official’s behavior in office. For example, if defendant Smith pays federal Judge Jones $10,000 to find Smith not guilty, the crime of bribery has occurred.

 

 

What are “high crimes and misdemeanors”? On first hearing this phrase, many people probably think that it is just an 18th century way of saying “felonies and misdemeanors.” Felonies are major crimes and misdemeanors are lesser crimes. If this interpretation were correct, “high crimes and misdemeanors” would simply mean any crime. But this interpretation is mistaken.

 

The Origins of the Phrase

 

 

But the committee’s recommendation did not satisfy everyone. George Mason of Virginia proposed adding “maladministration.” He thought that treason and bribery did not cover all the harm that a president might do. He pointed to the English case of Warren Hastings, whose impeachment trial was then being heard in London. Hastings, the first Governor General of Bengal in India, was accused of corruption and treating the Indian people brutally.

 

Madison objected to “maladministration.” He thought this term was so vague that it would threaten the separation of powers. Congress could remove any president it disagreed with on grounds of “maladministration.” This would give Congress complete power over the executive.

 

Mason abandoned “maladministration” and proposed “high crimes and misdemeanors against the state.” The convention adopted Mason’s proposal, but dropped “against the state.” The final version, which appears in the Constitution, stated: “The president, vice-president, and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

 

The convention adopted “high crimes and misdemeanors” with little discussion. Most of the framers knew the phrase well. Since 1386, the English parliament had used “high crimes and misdemeanors” as one of the grounds to impeach officials of the crown. Officials accused of “high crimes and misdemeanors” were accused of offenses as varied as misappropriating government funds, appointing unfit subordinates, not prosecuting cases, not spending money allocated by Parliament, promoting themselves ahead of more deserving candidates, threatening a grand jury, disobeying an order from Parliament, arresting a man to keep him from running for Parliament, losing a ship by neglecting to moor it, helping “suppress petitions to the King to call a Parliament,” granting warrants without cause, and bribery. …

 

After the Constitutional Convention, the Constitution had to be ratified by the states. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay wrote a series of essays, known as the Federalist Papers, urging support of the Constitution. In Federalist No. 65, Hamilton explained impeachment. He defined impeachable offenses as “those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.”

 

… (High Crimes and Misdemeanors; From Constitutional Rights Foundation; © 2014 CRF-USA)

 

Finding a crime directly linked to a sitting POTUS is difficult for justice to be maintained. President Barack Hussein Obama has pushed the criminal envelope to the limits and appears near untouchable because of the blathering love of most of America’s media and the love of political power by the most Left Wing Democratic Party in American history. I am surprised the numerous “phony scandals” has not produced links to actual murder in the name of political power. Thank God so far, that extant of nefarious scandalous illegalities has not come up pertaining to President BHO.  

 

The CCC email I referenced at the beginning of these thoughts exposes the fact that the Islamic terrorists that attacked Libyan Embassy annex in Benghazi had acquired stolen “State Department-issued cell phones from our U.S. diplomatic facility”. The Islamic terrorists utilized these phones to coordinate their attack on the annex mission that resulted in the murders of Ambassador Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty. The implication of the CCC email is that America’s Intelligence Community was listening to the Islamic attack coordination! This is another nail in the coffin of lies that exposes Obama and his Administration KNOWINGLY LYING to the American public just prior to the November 2012 election!

 

This is a ton of political evidence to bring Obama to an impeachment vote in the House of Representatives. BUT just like the Democrats in the Senate protected President Slick Willie Clinton from a Senate conviction, the same scenario would undoubtedly take place today in the Senate. EVEN if the GOP retakes the majority in the Senate there will be enough Democrats to ensure that a TWO-THIRDS majority would not be achieved to convict Obama and remove the most corrupt President from Office.

 

That leaves the only way for Obama to receive some justice for his criminal management of this Administration will be via the Civil Suit and/or criminal charges AFTER his term of Office ends in January 2017. AND there is a good chance Obama would escape that post-Presidential justice if a Democrat actually wins the 2016 election for President. Do you think someone like Hillary Clinton will allow civil or criminal discovery of Obama Administration law breaking to go on the public record? NO! A President Hillary would take a page out of the Republican playbook and give Obama a blanket full pardon preventing any kind of investigation from proceeding with the power of the independent Judicial Branch.

 

KNOWING these potential unjustified outcomes I say proceed with House impeachment proceedings at least after the 2014 election cycle to get something on the public record. Public revelations will make it more difficult for Hillary to become President and at the very least allow public opinion to force the Judicial Branch into action civilly or criminally.

 

JRH 6/15/14

Please Support NCCR

*********************************

New Benghazi Scandal Revelations

 

From: Office of CCC PAC

Sent: 6/14/2014 3:35 PM

 

Fox News has a stunning new report that shows that the Benghazi terrorists stole the State Department-issued cell phones from our U.S. diplomatic facility that they had attacked – and they used the phones to coordinate their attack with fellow terrorists.

But the most shocking aspect of the new report is that American intelligence agencies were listening in to the calls – and KNEW instantly that the attack on our compound in Benghazi was a terrorist attack.

 

US Spy Agencies Here Benghazi Plans - Obama Lied

 

These stunning new reports are further proof that the Obama administration lied to us about the Benghazi attacks, and then tried to cover up the fact that it was indeed a terrorist attack, and not a political rally in response to a YouTube video.

Please, do not let those four Americans who lost their lives on that fateful night of September 11, 2012 be forgotten, swept under the rug by Democrat politicians like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama who don’t want the American people to know about the lies and cover ups surrounding that horrific terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya.

Please review our TV ad below demanding that Barack Obama be held accountable for the Benghazi cover up, and if you want us to keep the pressure on the Obama administration for this scandal, make a contribution to our TV ad campaign – HERE.

 

VIDEO: TV Ad: Hold Obama Accountable for Benghazi Scandal

 

You can help us keep these ads running on the airwaves by making a contribution of any amount from as little as $5 up to the maximum allowed contribution of $5,000. 

To make a contribution online – JUST CLICK HERE.

Ever since the Benghazi terrorist attack the Obama administration, with significant backing from the liberal media, have attempted to hide the truth about what happened.  To cover their failures in combating terrorism, they told lies saying it was not a preplanned terrorist attack, even when they knew that to be an absolute falsehood.

 

Susan Rice- Benghazi Not Preplanned Attack

 

Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and countless members of the Obama administration have lied, concealed and attempted to cover up not only the truth but their failures.  As has been his pattern of appeasement in the face of Islamic terrorism, Obama himself would not even call this an act of terrorism.

 

USA Today- BHO says Benghazi Not Terrorism

 

Obama’s Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, said it didn’t matter whether Benghazi was a terrorist attack or whether she and the Obama administration had lied about it.

 

Hillary- What Diff Does It Make

 

The Obama administration has dishonored those who lost their lives on that fateful night of September 11, 2012 and now they say it doesn’t matter because it happened “a long time ago.”

 

Jay Carney- Benghazi Happened Long ago

 

It’s time to hold the Obama administration accountable for their misdeeds.

 

We know the media will try to whitewash the seriousness of this issue.  We need to get the truth out as soon as possible, so please make a contribution to our TV ad campaign that holds Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton accountable – CONTRIBUTE HERE.

 

Again, you can contribute any amount from as little as $5 up to the maximum allowed amount of $5,000.

 

You can also make a contribution online here:

 

Conservative Campaign Committee
ATTN:  Benghazi Ad Campaign

P.O. Box 1585

Sacramento, CA 95812

_______________________________

The House should Investigate and Subpoena Obama Administration to the Hilt

John R. Houk

© June 15, 2014

_____________________________

New Benghazi Scandal Revelations

 

Paid for and authorized by the Conservative Campaign Committee.  Not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee.