Archive for the ‘Corruption’ Category

The Democrats’ dark money groups plan to spend millions of dollars in key battleground states. That isn’t disgusting. That’s just politics. What’s disgusting is that they plan on politicizing the Wuhan virus.

According to the Washington Post, “the group Pacronym is planning to spend $5 million on ads attacking Trump’s response to the pandemic. Pacronym, whose board of directors includes former Barack Obama campaign manager David Plouffe, said its ads will target key 2020 swing states like Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Arizona.”

Good luck with that. The next time Democrats complain about dark money or too much money in politics, throw this information in their face:

Pacronym is the political action committee affiliated with Acronym, the non-profit who also funded Shadow, Inc., the company responsible for the failed Iowa caucuses reporting app. Acronym is financed by a larger democratic dark money group, New Venture Fund.

In 2018, the New Venture Fund gave at least $250,000 to Acronym, Acronym’s 2018 990 IRS forms show. New Venture Fund is just one of the dark money nonprofit funds under the umbrella of the for-profit, privately held consultancy called Arabella Advisors, LLC.

It isn’t just that Democrats don’t hate money in politics. It’s that Democrats have put together networks of dark money organizations to propagandize the people. It’s proof that Democrats can’t live without dark money in politics.

Another Democratic PAC called American Bridge said they will also be running similar ads politicizing the pandemic in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania. American Bridge told the Washington Post it would be placing an additional ad on “Trump’s incompetence,” including “clips of Trump himself downplaying the crisis.”

If that’s what Democrats want to do, fine. Let’s throw this back in the Democrats’ faces:

In that press availability, Biden said that the Chinese “are not bad folks, folks.” Let’s remind people in Michigan, Pennsylvania and other Rust Belt battleground states and see how Biden’s own words on China play, especially in light of China’s hiding the Coronavirus Crisis for almost 3 months. How do you think that’ll play with an out-of-work steel mill worker? How will that work with an out-of-work UAW worker in Ohio or Detroit?

David Plouffe is a talented political guy but he doesn’t have a clue about Trump’s Rust Belt battleground states. If Democrats want to politicize the Wuhan Virus, they should expect the Trump campaign to highlight Vice President Biden’s friendliness with China, including his son Hunter’s virtual affair with the Chinese Communist Party’s leadership.

Apparently, with Democrats, once just isn’t enough. Having totally screwed up Iowa’s caucuses, Democrats aren’t satisfied. According to PJ Media’s reporting, Nevada Democrats are intent on taking the fun out of dysfunctional:

In interviews, three caucus volunteers described serious concerns about rushed preparations for the Feb. 22 election, including insufficient training for a newly-adopted electronic vote-tally system and confusing instructions on how to administer the caucuses. There are also unanswered questions about the security of Internet connections at some 2,000 precinct sites that will transmit results to a central “war room” set up by the Nevada Democratic Party.

What could possibly go wrong? Here’s what might go wrong:

Some volunteers who will help run caucuses at precinct locations said they have not been trained on iPads that the party purchased to enter and transmit vote counts. Party officials scrambled to streamline their vote reporting system, settling on Google forms accessible through a saved link on the iPads, after scrapping a pair of apps they’d been planning to use until a similar app caused the fiasco in Iowa two weeks ago.

The Democrats’ problem isn’t the caucuses. The Democrats’ problem is that they don’t run things. Democrats don’t fix things, either. Democrats aren’t skilled problem-solvers. The Democratic Party was stronger when they had lots of governors. Bill Clinton was a governor who ran things. Barack Obama was a professor, then a senator. He didn’t run things. He just talked a lot. President Clinton made life better for people. President Obama didn’t make life better for people.

Bloomberg has run things but he’s cozied up to the nastiest people on earth. He’s done his best to ignore the Chinese leadership’s corruption. He’s even said that “Xi Jinping isn’t a dictator.” Seriously, he said that:

Bloomberg isn’t an idiot. He just plays one on TV when he’s trying to pander to the Chinese. Bloomberg is just a globalist who will sell out his nation so he can keep China open for business. His business. He’s President Trump’s opposite. President Trump stood up to China. Then he got them to cave on forced technology transfers and intellectual property theft. What about Bloomberg? He didn’t care how many Americans he had to sell out. He just cared about profits.

How will Bernie’s Bros take that? Bloomberg didn’t just sell us out. He’s attempting to buy the White House so he can sell us out. I’m not ok with that. I’m totally not ok with that. It’s ok to make profits. It isn’t ok to sell out this incredible nation.

Back to Nevada, though. Democrats have had 3+ weeks to put a system in place. They still haven’t put that fool-proof system together. I don’t know if they ever will. These Democrats are the ‘Gang who can’t think straight.’ Bill Clinton at least kept the trains running on time. Obama didn’t care if there were trains that ran. Bernie doesn’t care about anything except stealing everyone’s private health care. Trusting him with running our nation’s health care is as stupid as trusting an arsonist to put out a fire.

In this unserious op-ed, David Axelrod complained that “For all the righteous indignation about the outcome of Wednesday’s vote, I understand the reluctance of any senator to convict an elected president and forever ban them from the ballot. And if Donald Trump truly were “chastened” by impeachment, as several of the Republican senators who voted against removing him argued, it might have made their “let the people decide” argument more compelling.”

Democrats and some swampy Republicans aren’t the brightest people. President Trump wasn’t convicted because he shouldn’t have ever gotten impeached. The process in the House will forever be part of Nancy Pelosi’s, Adam Schiff’s and, to a somewhat lesser extent, Jerry Nadler’s tarnished legacies. Let’s remember what happened in the House. Let’s start with the most disgusting part first.

Impeachment Article 2 is the product of an infantile temper tantrum. On Sept. 24, Nancy Pelosi announced that the House was starting an official impeachment inquiry. That’s a bald-faced lie. Article I, Section 2, Clause 5 of the Constitution says “The House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.” It gives impeachment authority to “the House of Representatives” alone, not to the speaker, not to a committee. Madison, Jefferson and Hamilton didn’t want that authority resting in the hands of a Representative or a committee of representatives. They wanted everyone to share in the accountability.

When Democrats sent out the first set of what Democrats called “compulsory subpoenas”, the House hadn’t voted to authorize any committee to initiate an impeachment inquiry. In fact, the White House Counsel’s letter to House Democrats was sent 3 weeks before the vote authorizing impeachment. Ignoring long-settled precedent, which apparently is his specialty, Adam Schiff said that any delay in complying with the subpoenas would be considered an impeachable offense. The judiciary is there to settle privilege disputes between the legislative and executive branches.

Apparently, Mr. Schiff thinks that he’s the exception to that ruling. He’s wrong about that. He isn’t the exception. Patrick Philbin laid out this reasoning in response to a question.

As for Impeachment Article 1, Abuse of Power, no high crime was alleged. In fact, no crime was alleged. What’s worse, most of the testimony provided to Mr. Schiff’s committee wasn’t provided by witnesses. Most of the testimony provided was provided by people who didn’t witness anything. That’s why I consistently called them testifiers, not witnesses.

The transcript of President Trump’s July 25 call with Ukrainian President Zelenskiy is the best evidence of what was said during the call. Lt. Col. Vindman listened in on the call. He testified, reluctantly, that the transcript was “essentially correct.” The only fact witness called during the public HPSCI hearings was US Ambassador to the EU Gordon Sondland. Here’s his testimony:

Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler totally ignored this exculpatory evidence. They ignored this and other exculpatory evidence multiple times each. In a real court with rules of evidence, this wouldn’t have gotten to trial because the Democrats’ case had more holes than Swiss cheese. It would’ve gotten no-billed at the grand jury.

This isn’t surprising. Adam Schiff couldn’t tell the truth if his life depended on it. Here’s the first of Schiff’s ‘golden oldies’:

When the Mueller Report came out, the evidence that Schiff allegedly saw wasn’t found. Here’s another of his biggest lies:

Axelrod also wrote this:

Even without the witnesses and documents Trump denied them, the House managers delivered a devastating circumstantial case that the President used the levers of his office to pressure Ukraine.

Hearsay testimony isn’t admissible in a real court, with a few exceptions, and Axelrod knows it. Then Axelrod said this:

He was, as Sen. Mitt Romney said in his courageous dissent from partisan orthodoxy, “guilty of an appalling abuse of public trust.”

This is the Mitt Romney that Axelrod accused of being a sexist who hated women. This is the Mitt Romney that the Obama campaign accused of tying the family pet to the roof of their vehicle. Forgive me if I don’t get a sense of sincerity with his statements about Romney.

President Trump isn’t chastened. “He’s triumphant.” He’s triumphant because a team of liars accused him of abusing his power. He’s triumphant because Democrats didn’t present evidence proving that allegation. Democrats lost because 30 allegations still doesn’t equal 1 piece of proof. Democrats lost because 5 allegations repeated 20 times each isn’t proof either.

Axelrod is still the same corrupt weasel that worked for President Obama. Good riddance.

Michelle Benson, the chairwoman of the Senate Health and Human Services Finance and Policy Committee, issued this statement on the crisis at the Department of Human Services:

When the legislature reconvenes in about one month, health and human services will once again be at the forefront. Two of the issues that will be on our agenda are the dysfunction at the Department of Human Services and the rising cost of prescription drugs.

90-day review of DHS: On December 10, I convened a meeting of the Health and Human Services Committee for the purpose of reviewing new DHS Commissioner Jodi Harpstead’s first 90 days on the job.

Commissioner Harpstead has a difficult task in front of her, but her appearance did little to reassure me that she grasps the severity of the problems at her agency. Instead, she said that DHS is “not in free fall, in crisis, in total chaos.”

Evidence does not support that tone, nor am I convinced that changes are imminent. There have been more than a dozen reports of mismanagement and corruption since session ended. Most recently, we learned an assistant commissioner approved $1 million in payments to a nonprofit while serving on that nonprofit’s board. These payments doubled the group’s revenue.

The nonpartisan think tank Center of the American Experiment is tracking government abuses and mismanagement, so you can keep tabs on state government easier. You can view it their scandal tracker at bit.ly/MNScandalTracker.

We did get some good news on the DHS front. Gov. Walz announced he is hiring an independent consultant to look at breaking up DHS. It’s good to see the governor finally engaging this issue, and it is encouraging that it appears he is taking a small step toward reforms that Republicans have proposed for a while now. But we have to remember this is only a start, and conducting a review is not a substitute for action on the Governor’s part.

It is my sincere hope that Gov. Walz won’t try to reshape the agency alone. The only way this overhaul will be successful is if Republicans and Democrats, the Senate and House have a seat at the table. The “go it alone” approach brought us the failure of MNsure. Let’s not make that mistake again. Together we can figure out an approach that will benefit the entire state.

It’s been my contention that Commissioner Harpstead was a terrible pick to lead DHS. From the start, I thought that she was too prone to being secretive with information. Nothing in this update suggests that she’s changed her ways.

Denying that DHS isn’t in crisis is likely done to rebuild morale within the department. That’s the wrong goal. The first order of business should be restoring competence within DHS. If that means ruffling some feathers, then that’s what has to happen. Morale can be rebuilt after expectations are raised.

As the CEO of a major non-profit, cash-flow for Lutheran Social Services, aka LSS, wasn’t a problem. Money kept flowing in from the federal government. The minute President Trump clamped down on the Refugee Resettlement program, the cash-flow for LSS tightened exponentially. It didn’t take long for Ms. Harpstead to get this job as Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Human Services. She even talked about how she had led them to being in great shape for the foreseeable future.

In that initial testimony, Harpstead talked about being trustworthy in her opening statement. Denying that DHS has a problem won’t build trust. I’ve said this before but it’s worth repeating. The Senate should vote to reject her as the nominee to be the Commissioner of DHS. It’s time to find someone who will run DHS properly. People that think DHS isn’t embroiled in a crisis don’t have a grasp of reality. While that might fit the profile of a typical government bureaucrat, that isn’t the portrait of a trustworthy public servant.

The upper echelons of the FBI better prepared their lives turned upside-down. The Justice Department announced that “at least two of the FBI’s surveillance applications to secretly monitor former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page lacked probable cause.”

One of the people who should be worried about this news is Chairman Schiff. He should be worried because “Schiff had previously insisted the Page FISA warrants met ‘rigorous’ standards for probable cause, and mocked Republicans for suggesting otherwise.” Then there’s this:

The June 2017 Page FISA warrant renewal, which was among the two deemed invalid by the DOJ, was approved by then-Acting FBI Director (and now CNN contributor) Andrew McCabe, as well as former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. The April 2017 warrant renewal was approved by then-FBI Director James Comey.

This doesn’t mean that the first 2 FISA warrants met the FISA Court’s standards. It simply means that a determination hasn’t been reached on those applications yet.

At minimum, Rosenstein, McCabe and Comey should be very worried. Lying to the FISC should be accompanied by a lengthy stint of gathering striped sunlight. Their actions should result in the DOJ and FBI reaching a large, quick settlement with Carter Page. Clearly, Carter Page was hurt reputationally. When a person is hurt as a result of corruption, the corrupt people need to write checks with a half-dozen zeros to the left of the decimal point.

The Justice Department said the FBI should have discontinued its secret surveillance of Page far earlier than it did because “there was insufficient predication to establish probable cause to believe that [Carter] Page was acting as an agent of a foreign power.” The DOJ’s letter was revealed in a January 7 court filing unsealed on Thursday.

“Thanks in large part to the work of the Office of the Inspector General, U.S. Department of Justice, the Court has received notice of material misstatements and omissions in the applications filed by the government in the above-captioned dockets,” the letter states. “DOJ assesses that with respect to the applications in Docket Numbers 17-375 and 17-679, ‘if not earlier, there was insufficient predication to establish probable cause to believe that [Carter] Page was acting as an agent of a foreign power.'”

At this point, it’s indisputable that corruption was pervasive throughout the top echelon (singular, not plural) of the Obama-Comey FBI. It’s clear, too, that Rod Rosenstein wasn’t the boy scout he claimed to be.

Bipartisan support is growing for tearing down the FISC as it’s currently constructed. The judges that sit on the FISC were warned by Devin Nunes while he still chaired the House Intel Committee about these abuses:

“The way that the court has conducted themselves is totally inappropriate, they ignored clear evidence that we’d presented to them … they did absolutely nothing about it,” Nunes told Fox News host Martha McCallum late Tuesday. “They’ve left Congress no choice but to have to step in and fix this process.”

Finally, there’s this:

Everything you need to know about the House Democrats’ reply is found in the size of the Democrats’ response. While President Trump’s legal team’s first filing was 7 pages, the Democrats’ first filing is 111 pages. The Trump filing is sharp, concise and filled with substance. The Democrats’ filing appears to take a throw-the-spaghetti-against-the-wall-and-see-what-sticks approach.

The first lie contained in the filing states “During a July 25, 2019 phone call, after President Zelensky expressed gratitude to President Trump for American military assistance, President Trump immediately responded by asking President Zelensky to ‘do us a favor though.’ The ‘favor’ he sought was for Ukraine to publicly announce two investigations that President Trump believed would improve his domestic political prospects.” This isn’t the first time that Democrats have used this lie. What was actually said is this:

I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike … I guess you have one of your weal thy people … The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation … I think you are surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you said yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it’s very important that you do it if that’s possible.

It’s frightening that the Democrats said that President Trump called for an investigation into Joe Biden as a personal favor. That transcript is proof that Joe Biden’s name isn’t found anywhere in that paragraph. This isn’t a spin piece in Rolling Stone Magazine. This is a brief filed in the impeachment trial of President Trump. That dishonesty is enough to discredit the Democrats’ impeachment managers. Here’s another lie from the Democrats’ filing:

The second investigation concerned a debunked conspiracy theory that Russia did not interfere in the 2016 Presidential election to aid President Trump, but instead that Ukraine interfered in that election to aid President Trump’s opponent, Hillary Clinton.

Chairman Schiff tried slipping that lie into the record during the open committee hearing. Devin Nunes slapped that down immediately, noting that the Intel Committee had put out a major report telling how the Russians had interfered in the 2016 election. Then Nunes stated that, in addition to the Russians interfering with the 2016 election, Ukraine tried interfering in that election, too:

In its most detailed account yet, the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington says a Democratic National Committee (DNC) insider during the 2016 election solicited dirt on Donald Trump’s campaign chairman and even tried to enlist the country’s president to help.

In written answers to questions, Ambassador Valeriy Chaly’s office says DNC contractor Alexandra Chalupa sought information from the Ukrainian government on Paul Manafort’s dealings inside the country in hopes of forcing the issue before Congress.

That’s the definition of interference. This isn’t some obscure fact that was uncovered by months of interviews and digging. It’s something that took less than a minute to uncover with a google search.

There’s an old saying that’s often attributed to Abraham Lincoln that’s applicable here. Lincoln supposedly said “If you want me to talk for an hour, give me 5 minutes. If you want me to talk for 5 minutes, give me an hour to prepare.” The principle is that it doesn’t take much preparation to talk for hours. If you wanted something concise, though, you’d need time to deliver maximum impact.

Apparently, it doesn’t take much time to put together the BS that the Democrats included in this filing.

When you combine obviously biased ‘reporting’ with obviously biased polling, don’t be surprised if the polling is essentially worthless. That’s what happened with this ABC News/Ipsos Poll. Q1 of the poll is “Do you approve or disapprove of the way President Trump is handling the current situation with Iran? The result of the poll was that 43% approved and 56% didn’t approve. Q2 of the poll asked “Do you think the U.S. airstrike in Iraq that killed Iranian General Qassem Soleimani has made the United States: Less safe – 52%, More safe – 25%, didn’t make a difference – 22%.”

Polling that asks slanted questions like that is angling for a specific set of responses. In this instance, that’s precisely what ABC got. Further, the polling was done on Friday and Saturday. Finally 525 adults were surveyed. That means that this poll was junk. The MOE was 4.8%, which is terrible.

Q3 and Q4 deserve a category unto themselves. Q3 asks “How concerned are you about the possibility of the United States getting involved in a full-scale war with Iran? A: 32% replied that they’re “very concerned” and 41% are “somewhat concerned.” Q4 is about Speaker Pelosi’s handling of impeach. It asked respondents “On another subject, three weeks ago the House of Representatives voted to impeach President Trump, but House Speaker Nancy Pelosi did not immediately deliver the articles of impeachment to the Senate that would trigger a trial. Which of the following statements comes closest to your point of view even if neither is exactly right?”

“The fact that Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats did not immediately transmit the articles of impeachment shows that the allegations against President Trump are not serious and that the Democrats are just playing partisan politics” A: 37%
“By not immediately transmitting the articles of impeachment, Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats are doing their constitutional duty to ensure that there is a full and deliberate trial in the Senate and that the jury in the Senate is impartial.” A:39%

The frightening thought is that votes cast by these uninformed idiots count just as much as the votes of informed citizens. Still, how can serious people think that we’re on the brink of full-scale war with Iran? Then again, how can anyone think that Speaker Pelosi is an honest person? After watching this video, it’s impossible for me to think that she’s honest:

Early in the interview, Pelosi said that Sen. McConnell will be involved in a cover-up if he doesn’t allow witnesses. If that’s true, then Adam Schiff is a co-conspirator. Chairman Schiff didn’t call Bolton, Blair, Mulvaney and Duffey and he didn’t subpoena them, either. Further, Democrats should’ve called for a special counsel to investigate the Trump-Zelenskiy phone call. Congressional partisans like Chairman Schiff aren’t qualified to investigate corruption. There’s a reason why people don’t take partisan congressional investigations seriously.

We were told that this was a national emergency that couldn’t wait. Pelosi insists that GOP senators will pay a price if witnesses aren’t called. Coming from the woman who turned impeachment into a political weapon because Democrats can’t win this election if their lives depended on it, that’s rich. Pelosi and Schiff are nasty partisans who don’t have a bit of integrity between them.

There’s a new Democrat coalition. It consists of corrupt Democrat politicians like Pelosi and Schiff, partisan Democrat journalists like George Stephanopoulos and intentional push-polling aimed at providing a dishonest picture. Republicans have to defeat that coalition just to stand a fighting chance. That’s why President Trump hasn’t listened to people instructing him to stop tweeting. Without Twitter and other social media platforms, he would’ve gotten buried by now.

Finally, thank God he’s a fighter.

During his interview with Maria Bartiromo this morning, Devin Nunes talked about the corruption within the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, aka the FISC. House Intelligence Committee Republicans have been questioning the FISC’s integrity. Thus far, the FISC’s replies suggest a cover-up. Rather than answering Republicans’ questions, the FISC has stonewalled and given platitudes for answers. At this point, there’s a strong chance that FISA won’t be renewed when it expires this year.

Rep. Nunes expressed his frustration with the FISC during his interview with Bartiromo:

“It’s hard to imagine a worse person the FISC could have chosen outside [James] Comey, [Andy] McCabe, or [Adam] Schiff,” Nunes said. Speaking to Fox News contributor Sara Carter, Nunes added: “It’s a ridiculous choice. The FBI lied to the FISC, and to help make sure that doesn’t happen again, the FISC chose an FBI apologist who denied and defended those lies. The FISC is setting its own credibility on fire.”

It’s important to fill in the details:

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) has stunned court-watchers by selecting David Kris, a former Obama administration lawyer who has appeared on “The Rachel Maddow Show” and written extensively in support of the FBI’s surveillance practices on the left-wing blog Lawfare, to oversee the FBI’s implementation of reforms in the wake of a damning Department of Justice inspector general report last year.

The development on Friday, first reported by independent journalist Mike Cernovich, has roiled Republicans who have demanded accountability at the FBI. House Intelligence Committee ranking member Devin Nunes, R-Calif., told The Daily Caller that Kris’ appointment was “shocking” and “inexplicable.”

Quite frankly, this is what’s meant by the fox meeting the henhouse. By all accounts, Kris is the personification of the Swamp. Putting the Swamp in charge of reforming the Swamp is something that only the Swamp would think is reasonable. The truth is that this truly jeopardizes FISA.

If this is how unserious the FISC is, then they shouldn’t expect support from either side of the political aisle. There’s too much trust invested in the FISC to let it be untrustworthy. In fact, a total overhaul of that institution is warranted:

Earlier this month, the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) ordered the FBI to re-verify all previous warrant applications involving the FBI attorney who falsified evidence against the former Trump campaign aide Carter Page. However, Fox News has learned the court did not order the FBI to double-check warrant applications involving other officials who made key omissions and errors in warrant applications as the bureau sought to surveil Page.

The FISC’s failure to request a comprehensive evaluation of previous submissions has stunned court-watchers who have questioned whether enough is being done to deter future misconduct by the FBI. In the past, the FISC has gone so far as to prohibit some FBI agents from appearing before the court after finding impropriety.

What’s needed is a reform-minded person to fix the FISC. In fact, I’d argue for hiring someone from outside the FISC to help with the reformation. Andy McCarthy or Trey Gowdy would be at the top of that short list, as would Michael Mukasey. This isn’t the type of thing that I’d entrust to leftists. They aren’t trustworthy. Before reforming the FISC, I’d put together a commission to determine what reforms and safeguards were needed. Mssrs. McCarthy, Gowdy and Mukasey need to serve on that commission. Ditto with Joe Lieberman and Evan Bayh.

Eliminating the FISA Court likely isn’t a legitimate option. That being said, keeping it in its current structure isn’t a legitimate option, either. This needs to get fixed immediately. And I mean fixed, not tampered with.

Back in June, 2013, Rep. Ryan Winkler stepped in it when he criticized Republican-appointed Supreme Court Justices for ruling against the Voting Rights Act, which I wrote about here. At the time, Winkler tweeted “#SCOTUS VRA majority is four accomplices to race discrimination and one Uncle Thomas.” He obviously was referring to Justice Clarence Thomas with his Uncle Thomas quip.

Despite that exercise in racism, the DFL didn’t see anything wrong with making him the House Majority Leader after the 2018 midterm elections. He still isn’t bright enough to stay out of trouble. This past week, counties across Minnesota voted on whether they were willing to accept primary refugees. This week, Beltrami County voted 3-2 to not accept additional primary refugees. After the vote, Leader Winkler threatened counties that voted not to accept refugees with funding cut in this tweet:


Talk about strong-arm tactics. Considering his past racist comments, this shouldn’t surprise people. Still, it’s something that shouldn’t be tolerated. State Sen. Justin Eichorn published this statement criticizing Rep. Winkler:

I am deeply disturbed by DFL House Majority Leader Winkler’s threat to cut off funding to Beltrami County simply because the county did not vote the way he wanted. This hostile behavior from the Majority Leader has no place in government, and we should not move towards a society that requires quid pro quo or else. Rather than engaging in this destructive behavior, I encourage the Majority Leader to visit Beltrami to learn the importance of state aid for the area and why continued support will be critical in the future.

Ultimately, local control is one of the most important principles in our country. When President Trump empowered counties to have a voice in the decision-making process for the federal refugee resettlement program to empower them to make choices that are best for their area, that is the choice that the Beltrami County Commissioners made last night.

I’d add that President Trump’s executive action is simply enforcing federal law.

Specifically, the Refugee Act of 1980 requires consultation “with representatives of voluntary agencies and State and local governments.” That’s found in 8 U.S. Code §?1522 Clause B. Here’s the exact text of that part of the bill:

The Director shall develop and implement, in consultation with representatives of voluntary agencies and State and local governments, policies and strategies for the placement and resettlement of refugees within the United States.

It doesn’t say should, may or has the option of. It says that the federal government “shall develop and implement … policies and strategies for the placement and resettlement of refugees within the United States.”

I don’t doubt that Rep. Winkler doesn’t like Beltrami County’s decision. Elections have consequences, though, so if he doesn’t like the vote, he can run against one of the people who didn’t vote the way he wanted them to vote. Otherwise, he should shut his pie-hole. At minimum, he should deliver a speech saying that he’s retracting his threat.

The DFL governor has let the Minnesota Department of Human Services operate a slush fund within various programs, starting with the Child Care Access Program, aka CCAP, and programs for opioid addiction. The fraud in those programs literally run into the tens of millions of dollars. Now, the DFL House Majority Leader is threatening independent units of government because they didn’t do what he expected them to do.

This is gangster government at its worst. It should be utterly rejected this November.

It’s easy to name the Democrats’ corrupt impeachment of President Trump as 2019’s Story of the Year. There were other stories that deserve recognition but this story has all the elements of a heartbreaking story of corruption, media bias, partisanship at its worst and civil rights abuses. First, this story exemplifies partisanship at its worst. Democrats have literally tried impeaching President Trump since the morning after his election. Mark Zaid, the faux whistle-blower’s attorney, posted this tweet 10 days after President Trump’s inauguration:


This wasn’t a solemn event, as Ms. Pelosi insisted. This was the culmination of 3 years of deceit and corruption:

We had Chairman Schiff acting as the faux whistle-blower’s defense attorney, protecting the faux whistle-blower’s anonymity during public committee hearings. When Schiff wasn’t protecting the faux whistle-blower’s anonymity, he was violating President Trump’s civil rights by preventing President Trump’s legal team from representing him during the deposition phase. Schiff also violated President Trump’s civil rights when he refused to let Republicans call witnesses in defense of President Trump.

The impeachment hearings were filled with partisanship, too. This is what partisanship looks like:

Chairman Nadler was required by House rules to schedule a minority hearing day. That didn’t happen. One day of hearings was dedicated to listen to 3 Democrat activists masquerading as law school professors argue with Prof. Jonathan Turley about whether the evidence submitted by Democrats was sufficient for impeachment. Another hearing was dedicated to congressmen and women essentially making closing statements.

The hearings throughout ‘featured’ (I use that term exceptionally loosely) the worst in media bias. Day after day, the media breathlessly insisted that that day’s witness provided “bombshell” testimony. Night-after-night, the bombshell didn’t detonate. In instance-after-instance, the provocative statements in the witnesses’ opening statements turned into dud during cross-examination. Mike Turner’s cross-examination of Ambassador Sondland was the nastiest cross-examination I’ve ever seen:

That’s the personification of media bias and Adam Schiff’s corruption. Each day, networks like CNN and MSNBC and programs like the Maddow Report and Meet the Press Weekdays omitted the part about the exculpatory evidence. That’s why President Trump’s accusations of the Fake News Media resonates. People of integrity admit that CNN and shows like Rachel Maddow’s are corrupt.

They’ve carved out a niche, albeit a limited niche, that serves a political purpose in the Democrats’ quest for power. There was a time when Democrats cared about people’s civil rights. That Democrat Party, apart from Jonathan Turley and Alan Dershowitz is history. That Democrat Party doesn’t exist.

Impeachment is 2019’s Story of the Year but for all the wrong reasons. Impeaching President Trump with hearsay testimony while violating President Trump’s civil rights is awful. Impeaching him while Democrats displayed the nastiest partisanship of this century is worst. Impeaching President Trump with the enthusiastic assistance of the most corrupt media of our lifetimes is a trifecta Democrats should be ashamed of.