You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘John O Brennan’ tag.
Monday’s edition of Lou Dobbs Tonight on Fox Business Network was an eye-opener for those who had hoped for the best.
Earlier in the day, we saw the guest list, most prominently Leo Terrell, a well known civil rights lawyer:
These are the segments in order of his January 11 show.
Watch them and weep.
As the old saying in Europe goes, ‘When America sneezes, the rest of the world catches a cold’.
Lou began by reporting that, along with social media, ‘corporate America’ is repudiating President Donald J Trump:
Hmm. Interesting.
Many of us learned in history class — perhaps long ago — that fascism involved government co-opting corporations to do its will.
Tom Fitton from Judicial Watch was up next. He said that the Left’s — Democrats’ — main goal was to remove Trump from office:
Investigative journalist Sara Carter was interviewed, citing a tweet from former CIA director John O Brennan, who has been keen to get rid of Trump since 2016:
She called attention to his tweet from January 9:
Note the words ‘seeking national redemption’, ‘total denunciation of a despot’s legacy’ and ‘eradicate any remaining malignancy’.
Those are words I never expected to see in a communication from an American official.
Clouthub CEO Jeff Brain followed:
Speaking personally, Leo Terrell’s short segment was the best. He came right out and defended President Trump. I wish he had more time to speak:
The closing few minutes featured Lou Dobbs asking for short conclusions from everyone on the show:
In conclusion, the next four years could be very dangerous for the 74+-million people who supported President Trump.
Anyone doubting the possible peril can read John Brennan’s recent tweets:
Brennan reposted a video from Arnold Schwarzenegger, who looks really mean. Perhaps plastic surgery went wrong. He doesn’t look right, which doesn’t lend much credence to his argument against the president:
The next CIA director should be interesting:
Meanwhile, back at the Capitol building, members of the House of Representatives were struck by coronavirus. These seemed to be Republicans only:
The chief of the Capitol Police was dismissed last week. He warned about future security in the building:
A Massachusetts congressman objected to Trump’s award of the Presidential Medal of Freedom to his friend, the Patriots’ (American football) coach Bill Belichick. Wow. Suddenly, everything Trump touches, so to speak, is tainted:
Belichick will not be accepting the award.
Jake Sherman reports for Punchbowl. He had a series of tweets about the Dems’ moves to impeach President Trump for a second time. It is rumoured that Nancy Pelosi could sit on this for months and try to impeach him after he leaves office. This is a first:
This creates a problem for Republicans. This is evidence that corporate America is cutting off funds to the Republican Party. I feel sorry for House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-California):
It gets worse. Democrats propose to not recognise any Republican who moved to question the Electoral College vote. That is not very democratic, is it?
Looking back to Epiphany, Wednesday, January 6, while the president’s rally progressed in various parts of Washington, DC, the first lady was busy with a photo shoot of White House furnishings. She also appeared to distance herself from the very public gathering:
Hmm.
Returning to the Dems and the president, here is a draft of the House impeachment resolutions. I can’t see this proceeding, especially on the grounds of ‘insurrection’. No one loves the United States more than President Trump:
The seasoned congressman Steny Hoyer is fully behind the impeachment motion:
I do not understand how a trial can begin ‘right away’. They have to get a whole committee lined up. Good grief.
That said:
It’s unclear whether the Department of Justice will go along with the Dems on claims that the president incited unrest. PJ Media reported:
A senior Justice Department official says there are no plans to indict Donald Trump or anyone else who spoke at a rally just before the Capitol building was breached by a pro-Trump mob.
Ken Kohl, a senior prosecutor in the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington, said, “We don’t expect any charges of that nature.”
This will no doubt be enormously unsatisfying to Democrats who long to see Donald Trump do a perp walk into the federal courthouse.
Elsewhere in the nation’s capital, pro-Trump lobbyists are being shunned:
It’s worth remembering what happened last Wednesday into the early hours of Thursday. This is a concise summary from a commenter on the British political site Guido Fawkes (sorry, no permalinks available on his site):
Also, Trump’s public polling is unchanged, despite negative media coverage and his social media ban. The National Pulse reports:
Numbers from Rasmussen Reports show that following both of these events, his approval rating has shifted either one or two percentage points – exclusively trending upwards.
In conclusion:
In 2016, around the time of Trump’s election, I wrote that the Left — Democrats — were aping the Bolsheviks of the Russian Revolution.
I didn’t get much traction with that suggestion then.
What about now?
Election day is nearing and the Dems continue to pump out more untruths.
Before we get to those, rumour has it that Robert Mueller’s Russian collusion probe could end up being a damp squib:
Politico is left-of-centre, ergo not a Trump-supporting news site. Excerpts from their article follow, emphases mine:
That’s the word POLITICO got from defense lawyers working on the Russia probe and more than 15 former government officials with investigation experience spanning Watergate to the 2016 election case. The public, they say, shouldn’t expect a comprehensive and presidency-wrecking account of Kremlin meddling and alleged obstruction of justice by Trump — not to mention an explanation of the myriad subplots that have bedeviled lawmakers, journalists and amateur Mueller sleuths.
Perhaps most unsatisfying: Mueller’s findings may never even see the light of day.
“That’s just the way this works,” said John Q. Barrett, a former associate counsel who worked under independent counsel Lawrence Walsh during the Reagan-era investigation into secret U.S. arms sales to Iran. “Mueller is a criminal investigator. He’s not government oversight, and he’s not a historian” …
For starters, Mueller isn’t operating under the same ground rules as past high-profile government probes, including the Reagan-era investigation into Iranian arms sale and whether President Bill Clinton lied during a deposition about his extramarital affair with a White House intern. Those examinations worked under the guidelines of a post-Watergate law that expired in 1999 that required investigators to submit findings to Congress if they found impeachable offenses, a mandate that led to Starr’s salacious report that upended Clinton’s second term.
Mueller’s reporting mandate is much different. He must notify his Justice Department supervisor — currently Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein — on his budgeting needs and all “significant events” made by his office, including indictments, guilty pleas and subpoenas.
When Mueller is finished, he must turn in a “confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions” — essentially why he chose to bring charges against some people but not others. His reasoning, according to veterans of such investigations, could be as simple as “there wasn’t enough evidence” to support a winning court case.
Then, it will be up to DOJ leaders to make the politically turbo-charged decision of whether to make Mueller’s report public.
Government officials will first get a chance to scrub the special counsel’s findings for classified details, though, involving everything from foreign intelligence sources to information gleaned during grand jury testimony that the law forbids the government from disclosing.
They’ll also have to weigh the input from a number of powerful outside forces …
Now on to the Democrats.
Not a lot of people know that Trump is more popular now than Obama was at this point in 2010, the year of his first mid-term:
Why do Democrats vote against middle class interests?
Why do they keep saying Trump is racist?
Why do they lie about Republican plans for health insurance?
Excerpts from Dr McCaughey’s New York Post article follow:
Across the country, Democratic ads are telling voters a big lie. Dems claim they’re protecting people with preexisting medical conditions but Republicans would take that protection away. The idea is that ObamaCare is the only way to safeguard people with preexisting conditions. That’s false, and the outcome of the midterm elections could turn on this falsehood.
A super PAC allied with Sen. Chuck Schumer is behind many of these ads, including one targeting Republican Josh Hawley, who’s in a tight race with Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill. If he’s elected, the ad claims, millions of Missourians could lose their protections. In another ad, McCaskill tells the camera “Two years ago, I beat breast cancer,” then says her opponent would do away with protections for preexisting conditions like cancer.
These ads blatantly mislead voters. Hawley’s on the record insisting that health-reform legislation must include these protections.
So is Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, who has called on his state lawmakers to enact protections. But never mind the truth. The Democratic Governors Association is funding an ad with a breast-cancer patient saying she won’t be able to afford lifesaving treatments if Walker is reelected.
She says that Republicans in general are partly to blame for not explaining their position properly.
Here is the problem with Obamacare. I mention this specifically for my overseas readers who think it operates like the NHS. It doesn’t:
ObamaCare isn’t the only way to protect people with preexisting conditions. Just the most unfair way. It compels insurers to charge the healthy and the sick the same price. That’s the major reason ObamaCare premiums for 2019 are triple what they were in 2013 …
Right now, the middle class, who are ineligible for a subsidy, are getting priced out of ObamaCare. They’re hoping to enroll in so-called short-term plans that offer fewer benefits (no inpatient mental-health care, for example) and low prices. The Trump administration recently relaxed insurance regulations to help sticker-shocked consumers buy these plans.
Yet last Friday seven advocacy groups, such as the American Psychiatric Association, sued to stop these plans and slam closed this escape hatch from ObamaCare. The litigants said the plans would “draw low-risk people out of” ObamaCare. That’s exactly the point. People want choices and lower premiums.
She says a federal insurance-fallback program would address the issue. In the meantime, the Dems are perpetrating untruths:
Let voters choose based on real issues, not a phony one.
And, finally, there are the human ‘caravans’ coming in from Latin America via Mexico. The Left is organising these, just as they organised the one in June:
On that topic:
Mexico’s efforts during the week of October 15 looked good to begin with, but were ineffectual. Trump was understandably unhappy — especially with the Democrats:
So …
The Mexican president had addressed the country two days before, announcing that the government’s response would continue to be strong (possibly thanks to the American secretary of state Mike Pompeo):
Spanish-speakers might be interested in reading the supportive replies he received from his fellow Mexicans. They do not want these human caravans, either.
Regardless of what Dems and the media say — ‘Think of the children!’ — this is manufactured chaos involving a lot of clean, well-fed young men …
… who hate not only President Trump but also the United States:
The left-wing media are peddling false sob stories. They’re only on foot for photo ops:
This is the truth of the matter:
A reporter from the LA Times is in Mexico. She saw first hand that these people don’t care about law or order …
… or borders (‘We are humans’, ‘No one is illegal’):
And, who else could be among them?
I hope this Leftist — Democrat — chaos fails dismally, especially at the ballot box on November 6.
Texas
Robert O’Rourke — ‘Beto’ (pron. ‘Bay-toh’) — is running against incumbent Ted Cruz for the US Senate.
James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas was able to penetrate his campaign office and obtain jaw-dropping information. This is brand new, made around Halloween and posted online on November 1:
This is 23 minutes well spent:
The Project Veritas report says, in part:
Project Veritas Action Fund has released undercover video from current Congressman and US Senate candidate Beto O’Rourke’s campaign. The video exposes how his campaign staff appear to be illegally using campaign resources to buy supplies and help transport Honduran aliens. This is the eighth undercover video report Project Veritas has released in a series revealing secrets and lies from political campaigns in 2018.
Said James O’Keefe, founder and president of Project Veritas Action:
“Charity and helping your fellow man are things we applaud at Project Veritas Action. The problem is, you can’t break the law when you do it.”
…
A Project Veritas Action attorney reviewed the footage and assessed:
“The material Project Veritas Action Fund captured shows campaign workers covering up the true nature of spending of campaign funds and intentionally misreporting them. This violates the FEC’s rules against personal use and misreporting. It also violates Section 1001, making a false statement to the federal government. The FEC violations impose civil penalties, including fines of up to $10,000 or 200 percent of the funds involved. Violations of Section 1001 are criminal and include imprisonment of up to five years.”
The campaign found out that a group of Honduran illegals are already in the US and are stopping on their way to Missouri to be sheltered by a church. Sean Hannity has more dialogue from the video (emphases mine):
“You know that migrant caravan? A few of them got here already and they’re dropping them off like really close,” said a campaign field manager. “I’m going to get some food right now and some stuff to drop off.”
“Don’t ever repeat this stuff but like, if we just say we’re buying some food for an event, like Halloween events,” suggested another staffer.
“That’s not a horrible idea, but I didn’t hear anything,” said the manager. “I think we can use that with [prepaid campaign debit cards] to buy some food, all that sh*t can be totally masked.”
But, didn’t Dems say they weren’t going to help the illegals?
James O’Keefe followed up with Beto’s campaign manager and posted the following video on November 2:
Earlier that day Beto got an endorsement from Obama’s CIA director. Hmm:
O’Keefe has alerted the local newspaper:
Other media outlets have ignored the story, too:
I hope that any readers in Texas will circulate these videos this weekend. Apparently, this Sunday — the final before mid-terms — is when a lot of churchgoers vote.
Thank you in advance.
Churchmouse Campanologist 
The irony is that it was Antifa creating the spectacle of violence, Antifa, you remember, whom the corrupt fraudster called “just an idea”, and who on this occasion wore Trump fancy dress. The police escorted them into the heart of the Capital and then let them into the building. The Left, including our broadcasters, are now saying there was no security on the door because the Trump people were trusted, because they were “white” – actually no, Trump people are everything, but the left never lose an opportunity to stoke up hatred against people of European descent.
If Antifa hadn’t “stormed” the Capitol, the debate would have proceeded and we would all have heard a bit of the mountains of evidence the courts have refused to look at. Then Pence might have felt constrained to accede to the request of the defrauded states to be allowed to review their results in the light of further evidence. The Left could not risk that. But why would any Trump person want to stop the proceedings which were the first and last chance to hear some of the evidence? As it was, the weak Republicans were turned and Biden was endorsed in secret at dead of night.