Search
Archives

You are currently browsing the archives for the Investigations category.

Categories

Archive for the ‘Investigations’ Category

Though the Democrats have tried convincing consumers that the economic sky is falling, consumers aren’t buying the Democrats’ schtick. Instead, they’re heading to Walmart to buy lots of things that they can suddenly afford thanks to the Trump/GOP tax cuts. In case you hadn’t heard the economic good news, which is highly likely if you get your news from the New York Times or MSNBC, Walmart profits are up, consumer confidence is through the roof and retail sails are increasing, not decreasing.

That isn’t to say that everything is hitting on all cylinders. China’s tariffs on farmers are hurting them. Nancy Pelosi’s unwillingness to hold a vote on ratifying the USMCA trade agreement is hurting farmers and car manufacturers, too. That’s the intent of House Democrats. House Democrats hate President Trump more than they love prosperity and their constituents.

Desperate Democrats deny that they’re trying to talk the nation into a recession but the proof is too abundant to ignore. First, Trump-hating Democrats put their eggs in the Trump-Russia collusion concoction. When that failed, Democrats put their eggs in the Mueller testimony Basket. When that failed, Democrats put their eggs in the Racism Basket. The minute that failed, Democrats hurriedly put their eggs in the Recession Basket.

Larry Kudlow dumped a few pales of ice-cold water on the recession talk during his interview on Meet the Press:

Kudlow opened by saying “Well, I’ll tell you what, I sure don’t see a recession. We had some blockbuster retail sales consumer numbers towards the back end of last week, really blockbuster numbers…despite all of the worries about the volatile stock market, most of the economists on Wall Street towards the end of the week have been marking up their forecasts for the third and fourth quarters. That echoes our view.”

It’s worth noting that the negativity found in these doom-and-gloom reports talk about a slowdown. The minute that they hit the NYTimes or are reported on by CNN, the report changes from slowdown to recession. Isn’t that interesting? I wonder what additional information the NYTimes or CNN has that Wall Street doesn’t have.

Let’s review the fundamentals. Marginal tax rates are low. Corporate tax cuts have given CEOs new incentives to invest in bigger plants and more employees. The deregulation has triggered a huge boom throughout the domestic energy industry.

Let’s admit that the Democrats’ economy grew at a pretty pathetic pace. Think of it as keeping the car idling. When Trump got in, the economy shifted from being a family station wagon into a 73 Mustang with a 351 Cleveland in it. Suddenly, that idling station wagon turned into Steve McQueen’s Mustang from Bulitt:

Eventually, we’ll go through a recession. It won’t be anytime in the next 6 months, though. Too many people have much bigger paychecks thanks to the Trump/GOP tax cuts to let this economy start contracting anytime soon.

Let’s be clear about something regarding the thugs who shot at San Antonio’s ICE Facility. They aren’t protesters. They aren’t activists. They’re full-fledged domestic terrorists. Now the FBI is investigating the terrorist attack, as it should.

The people working in that building are federal employees, making it the feds’ jurisdiction. Obviously, I don’t know who fired the shots but it isn’t a stretch to think that the terrorists are affiliated with the Democratic Party. Democrats have said nothing about organizations like Antifa, #BlackLivesMatter and Indivisible. So-called protesters visited Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s home in Kentucky, where one of the terrorists said that she wished that someone would stab the motherf—-r in the heart:

Let’s hope that terrorist is arrested, tried, convicted and sent to prison. But that’s a different terrorist attack. Let’s return to the one in San Antonio. Here’s what we know at this point:

The FBI said Tuesday it is investigating after shots were fired in the early morning hours at a San Antonio office building that houses Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). No one was injured in the shooting, officials said.

Investigators say that around 3:00 a.m. Tuesday, shots were fired into a window of a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement office and Removal Operations Field Office.

Later, a press conference was held:

The FBI special-agent-in-charge Christopher Combs called it a “targeted attack.” “To fire indiscriminately into any building especially a federal facility is not an act of protest- it’s an act of violence,” Combs said at a press conference. “And in in this case it’s an act of violence that could have resulted in the assassination of a federal employee. That cannot happen in San Antonio.”

Isn’t it interesting that this terrorist attack took place in San Antonio, the home of Joaquin Castro, the man who outed Trump supporters? Isn’t it interesting that twin brother Julian Castro, a politician who is running for president as a Democrat, thinks that illegal aliens shouldn’t be charged with a crime for illegally entering into the United States?

If Democrats keep ratcheting up the immigration rhetoric by saying that detention facilities are like Nazi concentration camps, the depravity level will drop further. If Democrats keep talking about ICE ripping families apart, the next attack against an ICE facility might include fatalities. At this point, Democrats appear to be in a race to the bottom of the depravity barrel.

How low can Democrats go? God help us with that. It’s a frightening though.

When it comes to fighting corruption of all sorts, Tom Fitton’s Judicial Watch is downright impressive. Recently, Judicial Watch won their lawsuit against Los Angeles County. As the result of the lawsuit settlement, Los Angeles County has agreed to “sent notices to as many as 1.5 million inactive voters on its voter rolls. This mailing is a step toward removing the names of voters who have moved, died, or are otherwise ineligible to vote.”

That isn’t everything that California agreed to do:

The massive mailing is the result of a settlement agreement with Judicial Watch requiring the County to remove as many as 1.5 million inactive registrations. In addition, the California secretary of state has alerted other California counties to clean up their voter registration lists to comply with the federal National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), as the secretary promised to do in that same settlement agreement.

Fitton talked about the lawsuit in this tweet:


Last night, Christopher Hahn, a former senior staffer for Chuck Schumer, insisted that we don’t have an illegal voter problem. I wasn’t surprised that another Schumer shill would lie on national TV on important matters like civil rights. I expect it. This settlement says that Schumer’s shill is full of it. Removing 3,500,000 names off voter rolls who shouldn’t be there is a huge thing.

Further, this isn’t a conspiracy theory. It’s a conspiracy. The 1,600,000 names improperly on LA County’s voter rolls clearly are a problem. As a result of this settlement, those figures become findings of facts. This isn’t conjecture. They aren’t theories. They’re as real as gravity.

I expect that other lawsuits will get filed by Judicial Watch and that they’ll win the vast majority of those lawsuits. LA County didn’t settle with Judicial Watch out of the goodness of their heart. They settled because they knew they were likely to lose.

Anyone that thinks that Juan Williams isn’t living in a fantasy world just needs to read this article. The article is ostensibly about President Trump firing Dan Coats as his DNI, then appointing Rep. John Ratcliffe, (R-TX), to replace Coats full-time.

Williams takes Umbridge with the decision, saying “Coats fell out of favor with Trump for publicly confirming Russian interference in the 2016 election. The Trump appointee also raised eyebrows at a conference when he revealed Trump failed to consult with him before extending an invitation to the White House to Russian President Vladimir Putin.”

How dare the President invite a foreign head of state to the White House without first getting Dan Coats’ approval! Who does President Trump think he is, going over Dan Coats’ head?

Next, Williams expresses his indignation over this:

Trump will nominate Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-TX) to fill the role. Ratcliffe is a pure political player. He is a direct threat to the nonpartisan reputation of America’s intelligence agencies and to their ability to protect the country by producing unbiased, first-rate information.

Notice that Williams didn’t mention that Ratcliffe is evidence-based because he’s a former US attorney and a damn good one at that. That’s irrelevant to Williams when he has the opportunity to unfairly criticize a nominee.

Further, what planet is Williams living on? He thinks “America’s intelligence agencies” haven’t been politicized? Seriously? Has he ever heard of people like Jim Clapper, Jim Comey, Andy McCabe, Peter Strzok and John Brennan? Or is Williams stupid enough to think that they aren’t political hacks?

Later, Williams wrote that Ratcliffe “auditioned for the role last week, when he subjected Robert Mueller to harsh questioning when the former special counsel appeared before Congress.” Here’s Ratcliffe’s questioning:

The Mueller Report is a one-sided report. Further, Mueller’s report ignored Special Counsel guidelines while writing Volume II. If that’s treating Mueller harshly, it’s because he deserved it. Mueller wrote an impeachment op-ed instead of writing a confidential report outlining the indictments and declinations of the Mueller team.

Patty Murray, the third-ranking member of the Senate Democrat caucus, just displayed how frighteningly stupid Democrats are. Yesterday, Sen. Murray said “I agree with my fellow members of the Washington delegation that, as we have learned about the gravity of the potential threats to our democracy identified in special counsel Mueller’s report, it has become clear that the House should begin proceedings to determine whether the president’s action necessitate impeachment.”

Huh? We’ve known about the “threats to our democracy” since 2014. Why would that make one iota of difference in whether to pursue impeachment? The only thing that should affect pursuing impeachment is whether there’s evidence that President Trump committed the crimes of “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

The threats to our democracy happened during President Obama’s watch. They knew about the Russians’ attempts to infiltrate our election system and did nothing.

What’s interesting is that Jerry Nadler made an interesting statement in this interview:

Nadler said “When we get more evidence…” I didn’t know that the Judiciary Committee had evidence that an impeachable offense had been found. Simply put, it’s pretty clear that this is nothing more than a hoax. Democrats don’t have evidence that President Trump committed an impeachable offense. The American people see through the Democrats’ partisanship and they aren’t buying the hoax.

If Democrats want to continue beating this dead horse, that’s their option. I just wouldn’t predict a Lazarus-like outcome.

What wooden stakes are to vampires, the Mueller hearings, especially the House Judiciary Committee’s hearing, is to impeachment. When John Ratcliffe asked Special Counsel Mueller what other person (besides President Trump) had the burden of proving themselves innocent, Mueller replied that nobody has had that burden imposed on them. Rep. Ratcliffe asked that in reference to Andrew Weissmann’s statement that, while they didn’t indict President Trump, they didn’t exonerate him, either.

Each time Special Counsel Mueller couldn’t (or wouldn’t) answer key questions about Weissmann’s investigation, a little impeachment momentum disappeared into the ether. Once it’s gone, it isn’t returning. While Speaker Pelosi tries propping up her chairmen, she knows that impeachment is dead. She can put tons of perfume on that pig, it’s still just a pig. Here’s how Pelosi tried propping up Chairman Schiff and Chairman Nadler:

“The American people now realize more fully the crimes that were committed against our Constitution,” Pelosi said in the Capitol of Mueller’s testimony. “It is a crossing of a threshold in terms of the public awareness of what happened,” she later said during a news conference following Mueller’s testimony.

With little due respect to the Botox lady by the Bay, the hearings had the same effect on articles of impeachment that cold water has on campfires. If you want to watch Ms. Pelosi’s nauseating press conference, you can watch it here:

It’s easy to pile on Robert Mueller this morning. I’ve already done that in other posts so I won’t continue with that. That being said, the real villains in this travesty are the activists in the Resist Movement, Jerry Nadler, Adam Schiff and other Democrats, Rod Rosenstein (who never should’ve offered Mueller the position), the FBI lovebirds (Strzok and Page), Andrew McCabe, Andrew Weissman and Jim Comey.

Without these disgusting people, there wouldn’t have been a special counsel appointment. But I digress. Another thing that needs to be highlighted is the discipline that Republican members of the Judiciary and Intel committees showed yesterday. They shined like I’ve never seen them shine before.

Usually, politicians participating in high profile hearings specialize in grandstanding. That didn’t happen Wednesday. Each member focused like a laser on a specific topic in their attempt to elicit new information. That’s the new model that Republicans should adopt for high profile hearings from now on.

House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler also said his committee would go to court Thursday to seek access to grand jury material in the Mueller report and to enforce a subpoena against former White House Counsel Don McGahn to try to get him to testify. “Today was a watershed day in telling the facts to the American people. With those facts we can proceed,” Nadler said — although he, too, stopped short of calling for impeachment.

Stick a wooden stake in that impeachment vampire. It’s dead. CPR won’t resuscitate this patient, either. Fill our the toe tag for impeachment. Unless Democrats want to lose the House again in a landslide.

It’s obvious that Robert Mueller didn’t write the report that bears his name. It’s obvious that he was only minimally attached to this investigation. By his own admission, Mueller said that he sat in on “very few” of the interviews.

Today’s hearings didn’t produce much in the way of new information, though it provided some positive pro-Trump highlights. This is one of those pro-Trump highlights:

I’m betting, as I’m betting others are, too, that Andrew Weissman wrote the report. Further, I’m betting that he threw that line in there to help his fellow Democrats in their fight to impeach President Trump. It isn’t a secret that Weissman is corrupt.

Weissman is the prosecutor who got unanimously overturned by the Supreme Court for his prosecution of Enron. He knew what his burdens were. He didn’t let that stand in his way. He wanted that conviction even if it meant throwing Enron and Arthur Andersen under the bus.

Mueller looked totally unsteady, repeatedly asking that they repeat the question:

I don’t want to be disrespectful but Mueller looked as out of it as someone who’d just suffered a mild stroke. Another pathetic moment came when Mueller said that he didn’t know who FusionGPS was:

The other reason why I’m convinced that Weissman wrote the report and, in fact, was the de facto leader of the Special Counsel’s office is because they didn’t pay any attention to the Clinton campaign’s corruption.

To those that pay attention to congressional hearings, they know that the Democrats’ impeachment drive is over. That isn’t what’s important, though. What’s important is that Democrats won’t admit that impeachment is over.

Robert Mueller’s long-anticipated testimony is turning into a total disaster for Democrats. Drudge’s headline screams the reality:

Underneath the picture read the headline “Dazed and Confused.” That’s perhaps a little gentle. Here’s what Grabien wrote on Mueller’s testimony:

Mueller, who is often celebrated in the media for laser-like thinking, had to ask lawmakers to regularly repeat their questions, seemingly struggling to pay attention. At other points, Mueller got confused about whether the members of Congress were asking him questions or if they were reading from his own report. In just the first 90 minutes of the hearing, Mueller needed help understanding questions more than 10 times.

In one such exchange, Mueller — under questioning from Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wisc.) — asked: “And where are you reading from on that?” “I’m reading from my own question” the lawmaker reminded him. “Then can you repeat it?” Mueller asked, eliciting laughter from the audience.

In another painful episode, Mueller had to ask Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee three times to clarify and restate her question. Under questioning from Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), Mueller failed to follow a question that was merely 14 words long: “Attorney #2 in the Inspector General’s report and Strzok both worked on your team, didn’t they?” “Pardon me?” Mueller replied. After Gaetz restated his question, Mueller replied: “And the question was?”

Katie Pavlich touched on something that I think is significant:


It isn’t related but at the end of the House Intel Committee hearing, both John Ratcliff and Ranking Member Nunes simply thanked Mueller for his years of service and yielded back the balance of their times. It was like they knew they’d made their points and were resting their case. I think their instincts were exactly right.

The other thing that came through loud and clear was how authoritative Mueller didn’t sound. He repeatedly asked Republicans on the committees to ask the question again. At other times, he didn’t seem like he knew the contents of the report that bears his name. Clearly, he didn’t write this report.

If today is the last time he testifies on Capitol Hill, it will be a sad final chapter to his career.

Finally, the title I originally wrote said “Mueller’s testimony virtually ends impeachment.” As you can see, I’ve since deleted the word virtually. Democrats will keep investigating but that horse is as dead as our first 41 presidents.

Robert Mueller has a big problem that he can’t get rid of. When I say big, I’m talking about 6’8″ of a problem. His name is Jim Comey and, if Republicans choose to go this direction, Robert Mueller will have lots of uncomfortable explaining to do tomorrow. It isn’t that Comey is in Mueller’s report — except in Mueller’s footnotes.

Eric Felten of RealClearInvestigations, aka RCI, painstakingly reviewed the Mueller Report. What he found is especially noteworthy:

One of the bedrock decisions investigators must make in complex probes filled with incomplete and contradictory accounts is whom to believe. Dozens of footnotes in the Mueller report make it clear that the special counsel placed absolute faith in former FBI Director James Comey.

Dozens of the footnotes refer to memos Comey wrote recording his account of meetings and phone calls with President Trump. These include memos dated Jan. 7 and Jan. 28, 2017, as well as notes from Feb. 14, March 30 and April 11. Those memoranda were treated as the evidentiary gold standard by Mueller. Long stretches of the special counsel’s report hang almost exclusively on Comey’s say-so. One or another of Comey’s memos are cited some three dozen times in Volume II alone, which addresses possible obstruction by Trump. Mueller relies on Comey memos in footnotes 109, 110, 111, and 112, and then in footnotes 172, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182 and so on. Comey was also interviewed by the FBI and numerous are the footnotes — 68, 108, 109-112, 176-78, 180-82 and more, anchoring the narrative in his testimony.

If Comey is the verification anchor of Mueller’s report, then Comey isn’t an anchor. He’s a millstone — around Mueller’s neck. Here’s why:

Mueller relied so heavily on Comey’s memos that he felt the need to argue the superior believability of the former FBI head’s version of events. He uses legal citations that “contemporaneous written notes can provide strong corroborating evidence” and that “a witness’s recitation of his account before he had any motive to fabricate also supports the witness’s credibility.” Perhaps. But Comey was not a disinterested observer. As Paul Sperry reports for RealClearInvestigations, citing sources familiar with an internal Justice Department review, the FBI director Trump inherited was secretly trying to build a conspiracy case against the president.

Which means that Comey was writing his memos with an eye to swaying future legal and public opinion. Upon finishing a memo, he would run it by his top deputies (see footnotes 187 and 188 in Volume II) to make sure it served its purpose. Comey’s memos may or may not be the “strong corroborating evidence” Mueller claims, but Comey surely intended for those memoranda to establish his version of events.

Contemporaneous notes aren’t corroborative in and of themselves. If the ‘corroboration’ comes from a liar and a demagogue, they’d quickly turn into the aforementioned millstone. Put another way, GIGO, aka Garbage In, Garbage Out.

Put yet another way, trusting Comey’s insights of an investigation into the man who fired him is as foolish as relying on Michael Cohen’s testimony. The only person stupid enough to trust Comey or Cohen are people with a gun to their proverbial head. Add into that the fact that it was just discovered that Comey lied to President Trump while targeting President Trump:

Two U.S. officials briefed on the inspector general’s investigation of possible FBI misconduct said Comey was essentially “running a covert operation against” the president, starting with a private “defensive briefing” he gave Trump just weeks before his inauguration. They said Horowitz has examined high-level FBI text messages and other communications indicating Comey was actually conducting a “counterintelligence assessment” of Trump during that January 2017 meeting in New York.

If this is accurate, then what little was left of Comey’s credibility is gone. Subsequently, the credibility of Mueller’s report would likely evaporate. Mueller should’ve just left well enough alone:

This weekend, Adam Schiff went off the rails at the Aspen Institute’s Security Forum. Then again, his replies to questions didn’t sound that much different than his replies back in DC. Most importantly, Chairman Schiff, one of the Democrats charged with impeaching President Trump, insisted that DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s investigation into alleged FISA abuse is “tainted” because of political influence.

According to the Washington Examiner article, “At the Aspen Security Forum this weekend, Schiff accused top Justice Department officials of pandering to Trump by instigating a “fast track” report last year about former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. His comments came as part of a broader answer to a question about whether he has concerns about Attorney General William Barr’s review of the origins of the Russia investigation.”

That’s irrelevant. If IG Horowitz can gather testimony and forensic evidence showing that the upper echelons of the FBI didn’t tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth to the FISA Court, then those FBI people who signed off on the integrity of the Russian disinformation otherwise known as the Steele Dossier are in trouble. As a former federal prosecutor, Schiff knows that it’s what IG Horowitz can prove, not what Schiff can spin about in fanciful terms. What’s important is what’s verifiable. This is hilarious:

“I have no reason to question the inspector general’s conclusion, but that investigation was put on a fast track. It was separated from a broader inspector general investigation, which is still ongoing,” he said. “Why was that done? It was done so he could be fired to not get a pension. It was done to please the president when the initiation investigation is tainted. So are the results of that investigation.”

Immediately after Schiff said that he doesn’t have a reason to question the IG’s conclusion, Schiff questions the IG’s conclusion that hurts the Democrats’ drive for impeachment the most. Schiff is as easy to read as a children’s book. Jim Jordan chimed in with this pertinent question:

“Inspector General Horowitz is a professional. He’s conducting a crucial investigation into FBI and DOJ misconduct. But @RepAdamSchiff said his investigation is ‘tainted.’ What’s got Schiff worried?” Jordan tweeted.

Already, Democrats are deploying 2 different spin messages. The first is that the Mueller investigation was heavily restricted, which corrupted the investigation. The other is that DOJ rules for DOJ employees testifying limit Mueller’s answers, also corrupting Mueller’s testimony. Both lines of spin aren’t worth the bandwidth they’re printed on.

What’s most frightening is that this clown is in charge of the Intel Committee:

If you go to the dictionary to find the definition of the term dishonest broker, Adam Schiff’s face will appear.