Archive for the ‘The Swamp’ Category

At the heart of the Democrats’ impeachment drive is the Democrats’ contention that President Trump asked Ukraine to dig up dirt on Joe and Hunter Biden. That’s a theory that the media, myself included, hasn’t examined, at least not seriously. The thought that President Trump is worried about Joe Biden, especially at a time when Biden’s fundraising is struggling and his cash on hand balance is low, is misguided thinking.

President Trump understands that he’s a force of nature, politically speaking, and that there isn’t a candidate at the Democrats’ debates that’s clicking with the voters. Sleepy Joe Biden doesn’t excite anyone. Elizabeth Warren just blew up her candidacy with her Medicare-for-All tax increase. Bernie Sanders’ campaign just died at the hands of Crazy Bernie. Check out Crazy Bernie’s immigration proposal:

Key Points

  1. Institute a moratorium on deportations until a thorough audit of past practices and policies is complete.
  2. Reinstate and expand DACA and develop a humane policy for those seeking asylum.
  3. Completely reshape and reform our immigration enforcement system, including breaking up ICE and CBP and redistributing their functions to their proper authorities.
  4. Dismantle cruel and inhumane deportation programs and detention centers and reunite families who have been separated.
  5. Live up to our ideals as a nation and welcome refugees and those seeking asylum, including those displaced by climate change.

To use an old carpenter’s saying, Crazy Bernie’s plan is a full bubble off center. But I digress. The subject was Biden.

Supposedly, Joe is the champion of blue collar workers everywhere. There’s a flaw with that logic, though, which I’ve written about frequently. Sleepy Joe wants to ban fossil fuels. This video is from the Greenpeace USA Youtube channel:

The Obama-Biden administration also prevented the building of the Keystone XL pipeline. It didn’t take long for President Trump to reverse that.

These are the policies and candidacies that Democrats think are winners in 2020? There’s nothing to think these policies will connect with blue collar voters in Rust Belt states that Democrats need to flip. If Biden doesn’t flip ‘Blue Firewall’ states like Pennsylvania and Michigan back into the Democrats’ column, Democrats can kiss this election goodbye. Check this article out:

The battle is a microcosm of what is happening nationally: Big-city Democratic mayors are aligning themselves with leftist local officials and environmental activists to renounce disfavored industries. It also exposes the Democrats’ deep challenges with blue-collar voters. In both Western Pennsylvania and the Scranton area, the shale industry is opening up prosperity not seen for two generations—and inflaming climate zealots. “A Democrat can’t win Pennsylvania without voter support from those two regions,” said Mike Mikus, a strategist who consulted for Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf’s re-election campaign last year. “And you can’t win the presidency as a Democrat if you lose Pennsylvania.”

The point of this is that Biden is a fatally flawed presidential candidate. President Trump didn’t need Ukraine’s help to defeat Biden. Further, President Trump ran on draining the Swamp. If anyone personifies the Swamp better than Joe and Hunter Biden, it’d be the Podesta brothers.

Unlike other presidents, President Trump has made a habit of keeping his promise. He doesn’t have a perfect record but it’s better than any recent president.

  1. He’s building the wall, despite the Democrats obstructionism.
  2. President Trump moved the US Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
  3. President Trump signed the biggest tax cuts in US history.
  4. He promised small-town workers that they wouldn’t be forgotten. Thanks to the booming energy industry, he’s more than kept that promise.

Democrats whine about President Trump going after Joe and Hunter Biden because they aren’t used to a president actually getting serious about corruption. Joe and Hunter Biden are government corruption personified. They aren’t at John Murtha’s level but they’re still in the Swamp Hall of Fame.

Mark Zaid, the faux whistleblower’s attorney, apparently has a bone to pick with President Trump. He’s apparently a prolific Twitter user, too. Zaid’s tweets might hurt his client.

According to Zaid’s tweets, he wants Trump out of office ASAP:


What’s laughable is what’s written on Mr. Zaid’s profile page:

Attorney handling cases involving national security, security clearances, govt investigations, media, Freedom of Information Act, & whistleblowing. Non-partisan

That should read “Hyper-partisan” instead of “Non-partisan.”

Then, in July 2017, Zaid remarked, “I predict @CNN will play a key role in @realDonaldTrump not finishing out his full term as president.” Also that month, Zaid tweeted, “We will get rid of him, and this country is strong enough to survive even him and his supporters.”

Only in Washington, DC, would a man who tweeted out such tweets be considered non-partisan.

Tim Murtaugh, the Trump campaign’s communications director, told Fox News that “The whistleblower’s lawyer gave away the game. It was always the Democrats’ plan to stage a coup and impeach President Trump and all they ever needed was the right scheme. They whiffed on Mueller so now they’ve settled on the perfectly fine Ukraine phone call. This proves this was orchestrated from the beginning.”

As dense as Mr. Zaid is, apparently, Justin Amash is just as clueless:

“Actually, the Constitution specifically provides for the right of the accused to meet his accuser,” Hemingway tweeted. “Whistleblower protection has never — could never — mean that accusations are accepted without question. He of course must testify. To say otherwise is silly.”

Amash made this feeble argument against Hemingway:

“Yeah, at *trial* in a *criminal* prosecution,” Amash responded. “To say otherwise is silly. The best argument one could make is that it also should apply at trial in the Senate, despite not being a criminal prosecution, following impeachment in the House.”

Seriously? So a person can get impeached without the accuser having to testify? When did the USA’s judicial system become predicated on the notion that a person could get indicted by anonymous accusations?

It’s one thing to say that a person can get indicted without having their accuser cross-examined. While a criminal indictment isn’t fun, it’s a breeze compared with getting impeached. Getting impeached means that the president isn’t permitted to run the nation for the betterment of a nation. Does Mr. Amash think that the impeachment process not affect the entire nation?

If Mr. Amash thinks that, then he and Mr. Zaid deserve each other. They’re both losers if that’s the case.

Anyone that thinks that the Minnesota Department of Human Services isn’t suffering through a crisis hasn’t been reading LFR lately and they certainly haven’t read this article, either. After reading the article, LFR reached out to Rep. Nick Zerwas of Elk River, who consented to an interview.

Q: What has bothered you the most about this scandal thus far?
A: Obviously the total lack of accountability is disappointing (but predictable).
Q: You say that it’s predictable that there was a lack of accountability. Why is that predictable?
A: In all of the scandals at DHS over the last 7 years I’ve been in the legislature, I can’t recall anyone ever being held accountable.

If you visit Rep. Zerwas’ legislative website, you’ll see a lengthy list of statements on the DHS crisis. Unfortunately, it doesn’t appear that DHS management has responded to the crisis.

Rep. Zerwas issued this statement yesterday:

Rep. Nick Zerwas, R-Elk River, who serves on the House Health and Human Services Finance Division and has called for a full forensic audit of all state and federal spending at the embattled agency, is calling on Ramsey County Attorney John Choi to examine the latest report, and determine whether the Ramsey County Attorney’s Office should step in to prosecute the repeated violations of law.

“While I appreciate the good-faith efforts Commissioner Harpstead is making to clean up the agency and restore public trust, at some point we must determine whether there are consequences for violating the laws we have in place,” Zerwas said. “If the agency is unwilling to hold employees accountable, then it may be time for law enforcement to step in.”

At this point, actions and consequences are more important than words. If the Ramsey County Attorney won’t prosecute lawbreakers, then it’ll be apparent that their office isn’t taking this seriously. There were other questions asked of Rep. Zerwas. This one stood out:

Q: One final question: Should the legislature break up DHS? Or is just changing the culture required?
A: I think the agency is too large, and I would support breaking it up. However, a restructure of DHS alone will not fix anything. If the employees don’t believe there will be consequences for their illegal actions, then I guarantee you nothing will change.

That’s the growing consensus about DHS. There’s no question that the culture must change. The Department must change, too.

The records obtained by the newspaper show employees sometimes allowed vendors and grantees to perform work or services without finalized and signed contracts, while in other cases employees bought products such as software without the required permission. Department officials said the agency has safeguards in place that prevent spending in such situations. But legislators said the violations put the agency at risk for misusing taxpayer dollars.

Thank God for those departmental safeguards. Where would we be without them? Apparently, DHS management doesn’t pay much attention to those ‘safeguards’. Question: Can they be considered safeguards if nobody pays attention to them?

If there’s anything that’s predictable, it’s that the Swamp protects its own. Nowhere is that more visible today than with the faux whistleblower, whose name (allegedly Eric Ciaramella) was disclosed by Donald Trump Jr. today. According to this article, “current and former intelligence officials tell NBC News” that “pressure is building on the spy agency’s director, Gina Haspel, to take a stand on the matter.”

Fine. Here’s a stand that these Swamp critters won’t like. Haspel should side with the Constitution. Specifically, Haspel should side with the Sixth Amendment, which says “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.”

TRANSLATION: Anyone accused of a crime has the right to cross-examine his accusers, just like he has a right to accuse those accusers. The standard is that defendants shall have the right to confront their accusers. It doesn’t say that defendants might have that right if the wind is out of the west and if we’ve just had a full moon. It says that, in all situations, the defendant shall have that right. Predictably, the faux whistleblower’s attorney isn’t fond of the idea of his client’s name getting outed:

Andrew Bakaj, the whistleblower’s lead lawyer, has said that disclosure of his client’s name would deter future whistleblowers and he has threatened legal action against anyone who reveals the name. In a statement Wednesday, the whistleblower’s lawyers said “identifying any suspected name … will place that individual and their family at risk of serious harm.”

First, it isn’t known if this person qualifies as a whistleblower. Just because his/her attorney says the person is a whistleblower doesn’t make it Gospel fact. Next, if the alleged whistleblower has a partisan political agenda that includes removing the president from office, then exposing the alleged whistleblower’s identity is a patriotic thing. I want people who gossip about things that they heard to not be protected. If this person didn’t abide by the laws of integrity, they don’t deserve protection.

The inspector general for the intelligence community, Michael Atkinson, found the whistleblower’s complaint about Trump’s alleged pressure campaign on Ukraine to be credible. The description of events in the complaint, which has been public for weeks, has largely been confirmed by the transcript of Trump’s July phone call with the Ukrainian president and by the publicly available testimony of other witnesses in recent weeks.

Michael Atkinson should testify when the House Impeachment Committee, chaired by hyperpartisan Democrat Adam Schiff, conducts public hearings. What made the whistleblower’s testimony credible? Was it the fact that none of it was first-hand information? Was it the fact that no court in the nation would’ve admitted this information into a court because it’s hearsay, which is inadmissible except in a few exceptions?

“Since the affiliation of the whistleblower is unacknowledged, it is up to the Acting DNI Joe McGuire to take a firm public and private stance against any effort to expose the whistleblower,” Brennan told NBC News. “Other leaders of the Intelligence Community should privately oppose any attempt to name the whistleblower. Senator Paul’s appalling call for the naming of the whistleblower by the media should be denounced in the strongest terms possible; a statement signed by the heads of all the intelligence agencies would be most appropriate.”

Based on what, Mr. Brennan? Why should partisan snitches peddling gossip get protection? This isn’t the case of a patriot saving the nation from a madman. This is the case of a renegade madman trying to save a nation from a patriot.

It isn’t often that Lindsey Graham and Rand Paul agree so I’d better record this for history’s sake:

This morning, Matt Gaetz, a member of the House Judiciary Committee, tried to listen to Fiona Hill, allegedly a Schiff-coached witness. Schiff didn’t permit his entry. The Democrats aren’t letting Republicans in even though Gaetz has the proper security clearance. Yesterday, Chairman Schiff told CBS’s Margaret Brennan that “If witnesses could tailor their testimony to other witnesses. They would love for one witness to be able to hear what another witness says so that they can know what they can give away and what they can’t give away.”

Does Chairman Schiff, one of the nastiest, most dishonest partisan Democrats on Capitol Hill, have proof that any witnesses have provided false testimony? Do Democrats have any proof that any witnesses have thought about providing false testimony? Later, Schiff continued, saying “Now we may very well call some of the same witnesses or all the same witnesses in public hearings as well. But we want to make sure that we meet the needs of the investigation and not give the president or his legal minions the opportunity to tailor their testimony and in some cases fabricate testimony to suit their interests.”

Schiff has already let one liar into that secure facility. That person’s name is Adam Schiff. Remember this?

He called that a parody. I call it a bald-faced lie. Then there’s this:

That’s when Schiff insisted that he hadn’t talked with the whistleblower. Today, Schiff’s insisting that he “misspoke.” That’s BS. Schiff didn’t misspeak. Schiff lied intentionally.

In other words, the problem restricting liars isn’t keeping Republicans out. Democrats are secretive liars on the inside. Not just that but Democrats are prolific leakers, with Shiffty Schiff being the worst of the worst.

George Mesires, Hunter Biden’s attorney, issued this statement regarding Hunter’s work for Burisma:

Despite extensive scrutiny, at no time has any law enforcement agency, either domestic or foreign, alleged that Hunter engaged in wrongdoing at any point during his five-year term.

That’s classic Swampspeak. Hunter’s dad was a Democrat senator before becoming a Democrat vice president. As a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, he would’ve had significant influence into ethics and conflict-of-influence laws. It wouldn’t have been difficult for anyone in that position to put in place provisions that would’ve made it difficult to do something illegal.

That’s like asking an arsonist to write laws regarding criminal arson. The principle is the same. Asking corrupt people to write laws that govern themselves is stupid. The chances of corrupt people writing legislation that’s friendly to corrupt people is 100%.

Hunter Biden and Joe Biden are birds of corrupt feathering. That they didn’t do anything illegal is just proof that the Swamp protects its own. It isn’t proof that Swamp people are honest. Hunter isn’t too stable, either:

It’s one thing for a corrupt Ukrainian business to shovel $200,000 a month into Hunter’s bank account. It’s another when the Chinese government pays Hunter $450,000 a year for a high-profile person who’s been in-and-out of substance abuse rehabilitation centers more times than I’ve been to a grocery store in the last year. Why should I think that the Chinese would pay him $450,000 a year if not for influence-peddling?

Remember this oldie-but-goodie?

Biden insists that China is a nothing compared to the US. Right. Then we find out that his son is getting rich working for the Chinese. But, hey, everything’s on the up-and-up, Creepy Joe insists. R-I-I-I-G-H-T! What could possibly go wrong?