Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe is running from the truth in the latest installment of his failed coup drama. In a Monday interview with NPR discussing his leaking and firing during the Russian collusion investigation, McCabe dodged questions about lying under oath. His excuse: “ongoing legal issues” prevent him from answering host Steve Inskeep’s
Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe is running from the truth in the latest installment of his failed coup drama. In a Monday interview with NPR discussing his leaking and firing during the Russian collusion investigation, McCabe dodged questions about lying under oath. His excuse: “ongoing legal issues” prevent him from answering host Steve Inskeep’s questions. The reasons for not indicting McCabe for collusion and conspiracy are quickly vanishing. The fact that NPR and other mainstream organs are asking these questions is a key indicator.
Here’s more from Breitbart…
Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe appeared Monday on NPR’s “Morning Edition” to discuss his firing from the Bureau and the investigation into leaking information to The Wall Street Journal.
NPR host Steve Inskeep asked McCabe multiple times about the investigation and lying under oath, which McCabe dodged each time by blaming the “ongoing legal issues” that he is “handling.”
Partial transcript of the exchange as follows:
INSKEEP: At what point did it become apparent to you that you were under investigation?
MCCABE: That’s a really complicated question, Steve. And I’m afraid it’s one that I’m not going to be able to answer for you because of the current legal matters that are still underway.
Democrats vying for the 2020 ticket are afraid of being labeled “moderate.” Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) told Rachel Maddow, “I think [voters] should see me as a progressive because I believe in progress, and I have worked towards progress my whole life.” Then there’s Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY). She’s hopping on Beto’s bandwagon not only to oppose President Trump’s efforts to build a border wall but also to tear down existing sections of it! In an election where being a “centrist” may be key to winning “flyover country,” the Left’s contenders don’t seem to care much. With the Democrats tacking hard to the Left, they’re leaving the center wide open for Trump to cultivate. Let the circus begin.
Here’s more from Fox News…
Sen. Amy Klobuchar is highlighting her work bridging the political divide as she embarks on a 2020 presidential campaign – just don’t call her a “moderate.”
The day after the Minnesota Democrat declared her candidacy, she pushed back against the label, telling Rachel Maddow, “I think [voters] should see me as a progressive because I believe in progress and I have worked towards progress my whole life.”
The senator then touted a litany of “progressive” accomplishments during her years in Washington and at the state level.
The response underscored how even those candidates considered within the party’s center-left are reluctant to be seen as somehow ignoring the wishes of the – vocal and influential – liberal base. The label “moderate” is scorned, avoided as a potentially fatal term in a primary campaign stacked with left-wing heavyweights like Sens. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Kamala Harris of California and Cory Booker of New Jersey, who speak glowingly of big-government policies like the Green New Deal. Most recently, populist firebrand Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont on Tuesday launched his second straight bid for the Democratic nomination.
Democratic National Committee chairman Tom Perez doesn’t see a problem with being a socialist in a capitalist society. In fact, he says the two political/economic philosophies can “absolutely” coexist. His remarks were made in a Meet the Press interview with NBC’s Chuck Todd, who asked, “Can you be a Democratic socialist and for moral capitalism?” To this Perez responded, “Absolutely.” He then went after Ronald Reagan’s 1963 opposition to Medicare on the premise that it “will lead to socialized medicine and will lead to socialism in America.” The irony clearly went over Perez’s head. Perhaps Perez should visit one of our nation’s premier federally run veterans hospitals to witness the state of socialized health care at its finest.
Here’s more from PJ Media…
Tom Perez, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, has a tough job these days. His biggest problem is that he heads a crazy party.
But his next biggest problem is almost as difficult: how does he reconcile the two wings of his party?
The first wing — let’s call them the Looney Tunes Democrats — don’t just want to “transform America.” Them’s small potatoes. The Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wing of the party wants nothing less than to destroy America and rebuild it in a socialist image. The Green New Deal is the perfect manifestation of this thrust to destroy and then rebuild. Of course, by the time Ocasio-Cortez and her allies are done, we’ll have a barter economy where “shared scarcity” is the norm and little kids get treats for catching the most rats.
The second wing of the Democratic Party — let’s call them the Perpetually Outraged Democrats — don’t necessarily want to destroy America.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is doubling down on scare tactics to thwart support for President Trump’s national emergency declaration. Pelosi warns that a future Democratic president could declare an emergency state to force gun control on America. Quoth Pelosi, “Democratic presidents can declare emergencies as well. So the precedent that the president is setting here is something that should be met with great unease and dismay by the Republicans…Let’s talk about today, the one-year anniversary of another manifestation of the epidemic of gun violence in America. That’s a national emergency.” In which Pelosi just showed the Left’s hand for a future administration.
Here’s more from The Daily Caller…
WASHINGTON, D.C. — House Speaker Nancy Pelosi warned President Donald Trump on Thursday that a future Democratic president could declare a national emergency to achieve an agenda, such as gun control policy.
Responding to the president’s announcement that he will declare a national emergency related to the U.S. southern border, Pelosi maintained that “Democratic presidents can declare emergencies as well. So the precedent that the president is setting here is something that should be met with great unease and dismay by the Republicans.”
Speaker Pelosi told reporters at her weekly press conference, “You want to talk about a national emergency? Let’s talk about today, the one-year anniversary of another manifestation of the epidemic of gun violence in America. That’s a national emergency. Why don’t you declare that emergency, Mr. President?”
“I’m not advocating for any president to do an end run around Congress. I’m just saying that the Republicans should have some dismay about the door they are opening, the threshold they are crossing,” Pelosi continued.
Jewish-born Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) wants America to know that he stands with anti-Semitic Representative Ilhan Omar (D-MN), saying, “We will stand by our Muslim brothers and sisters.” Sanders is, of course, more known for his very high-profile support of anti-Semites, including the anti-Semite British Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn. He has on more than one occasion also made clear that the “occupation” of Israel on the “Palestinian territories” “runs contrary to fundamental American values.” With friends like Sanders, who needs any enemies?
Here’s more from The Daily Wire…
Sen. Bernie Sanders, who was born Jewish but who has attacked Israel for years, called anti-Semitic Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) on Tuesday to offer his support, reportedly saying, “We will stand by our Muslim brothers and sisters.”
As reported by Jewish Insider, and confirmed by The Daily Beast, Sanders spoke with Omar. The Daily Beast reported:
Omar’s office confirmed that the congresswoman spoke with Sanders—who is Jewish—but the conversation was off-record and so they could not go into further details about the contents of the discussion. A source familiar with the conversation confirmed to The Daily Beast that Sanders expressed support for Omar.
The Daily Beast noted that Jewish Insider had stated Sanders had discussed Omar’s anti-Semitic tweets on a conference call hosted by James Zogby. The Daily Beast added, “Zogby told The Daily Beast the call was off-record when contacted about the veracity of the reporting, but the source familiar with the lawmakers’ conversation confirmed the Jewish Insider story.”
Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Lindsey Graham (R-SC) is calling for Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to retestify before Congress following former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe’s remarks that the Justice Department was holding serious talks to remove President Trump from office. “Yeah, I would like to know what happened. You’re having a conversation about whether or not you’re going to invoke the 25th Amendment,” Graham remarked. The Department of Justice has already released a statement calling McCabe’s account “inaccurate and factually incorrect.” We’ve predicted that the FBI’s collusion against Trump would eventually unravel. Now it looks to be a reality. This should get fun.
Here’s more from The Hill…
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said Thursday he would like to bring Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein back to Capitol Hill to testify about claims that the Justice Department official discussed a plan to potentially remove President Trump from office.
Graham, who serves as chairman of the Judiciary Committee, indicated his interest in hearing from Rosenstein after former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe told CBS that Rosenstein had offered to wear a wire around the president and that there were serious conversations about invoking the 25th Amendment to remove Trump.
“Yeah, I would like to know what happened. You’re having a conversation about whether or not you’re going to invoke the 25th Amendment,” Graham said when asked if he would subpoena Rosenstein to testify if he didn’t agree to appear before the panel.
Instead of letting the Russia collusion conspiracy theory die an ignominious death, the Left is doubling down on its increasingly ludicrous and stale allegations against President Trump. In fact, the only way they will let this go is if President Trump can somehow miraculously prove a negative, which is impossible. Following the Senate Intelligence Committee’s statement that it found no evidence of collusion, journalist Ken Dilanian tweeted: “To be clear, the Senate Intelligence Committee has not found evidence exonerating Trump either.” Facepalm. Meanwhile, former Obama CIA Director John Brennan called it “collusion in plain sight,” which is an interesting claim since no evidence is accordingly found “in plain sight.” What HAS been found just yesterday, however, is collusion by the FBI to remove Trump from office.
Here’s more from The Daily Wire…
On Wednesday’s episode of “The Andrew Klavan Show,” the host discusses the lack of evidence uncovered by Robert Mueller’s special counsel probe into then-candidate Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and alleged ties to the Russian government. Transcript and video below.
The Democrats don’t want to let this Russian collusion narrative go, they can’t let it go because they have built up this entire mythology. Here’s the truth: Trump won because he outsmarted a terrible candidate. I mean Trump may not have been that great a candidate either, but he outsmarted Hillary Clinton. She was always a bad politician, she was a bad retail politician, she was a bad wholesale politician, she had a history of corruption that was as long as your arm, she had a scandal ongoing during the campaign that was a genuine scandal, a real scandal. Just the fact that the Russians were diddling around trying to divide people, which they always do, I’m sure we do it to them as well, it’s just spy versus spy stuff, it’s not that big a deal. They just seized on that, and they have now spent millions of our dollars chasing this down.
Oh, to have friends in high places. Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton certainly does. In fact, America is just now learning to what extent she did per FBI emails finally released over two years after a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) was filed. According to the emails, the FBI under then Director James Comey had a quid pro quo deal in place with the Obama State Department to do damage control in the final weeks leading up to the 2016 election. According to a report from The Daily Wire, the “deal” was originally reported by Fox News’ Catherine Herridge and Pamela K. Browne in October 2016. Then Republican Representative Jason Chaffetz (UT) told Fox News: “This is a flashing red light of potential criminality.” Hmm. What was the first clue? Seriously, is anyone surprised?
Here’s more from The Daily Wire…
Over two years after the fact, newly released FBI emails obtained via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request confirm that James Comey’s FBI attempted to work out a quid pro quo deal with the Obama State Department to help minimize the Hillary Clinton private email server scandal just weeks before the 2016 election.
Fox News’s Catherine Herridge and Pamela K. Browne first reported on the alleged deal back on October 15, 2016, but full confirmation did not come until this week when the government transparency watchdog group Judicial Watch released FBI communication related to the deal.
“FBI interview summaries and notes, provided late Friday to the House Government Oversight and Intelligence Committees, contain allegations of a ‘quid pro quo’ between a senior State Department executive and FBI agents during the Hillary Clinton email investigation, two congressional sources told Fox News,” Herridge and Browne reported in 2016. “This is a flashing red light of potential criminality,” Republican Rep. Jason Chaffetz (Utah) told Fox News at the time. “In return for altering the classification, the possibility of additional slots for the FBI at missions overseas was discussed,” he said.
Within hours of then FBI Director James Comey informing Congress in October 2016 that the Hillary Clinton secret server investigation was being reopened, Hillary Clinton’s lawyer, David Kendall, emailed the bureau demanding a phone call “ASAP.” Former FBI General Counsel James Baker, who received the email, said Kendall complained about the “tantalizingly ambiguous” Comey letter to Congress, according to an email thread obtained by Judicial Watch in a FOIA request. The emails also reveal that the conference call with Clinton’s lawyer was arranged by anti-Trump now ex-FBI agent Peter Strzok, who would go on to serve in the Mueller Russia collusion investigation. It’s not at all outside the realm of assumption that Kendall expected Comey and his FBI stooges to be more accommodating during the campaign.
Here’s more from Washington Examiner…
Emails obtained by a conservative watchdog show the frantic series of events that transpired at the FBI after then-FBI Director James Comey informed Congress in October 2016 that his bureau was reopening an investigation into the former secretary of state’s use of a private email server.
Hours after Comey sent a letter to Congress on Oct. 28 informing lawmakers the probe he shut down that summer was getting news life less than two weeks before the presidential election, Clinton’s lawyer, David Kendall, emailed former FBI General Counsel James Baker to demand a call “ASAP.”
Baker told colleagues he spoke to Kendall, who he said complained Comey’s letter was “tantalizingly ambiguous” and made statements that were “inchoate and highly ominous,” according to an email thread released by Judicial Watch.
The note was forwarded to several top FBI officials, including Comey. The emails also show soon after a conference call was set up by Peter Strzok, the infamous ex-FBI agent who exchanged anti-Trump text messages with FBI lawyer Lisa Page and has fueled concern among GOP lawmakers that there is rampant bias in the FBI.
Former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton just can’t move on and accept that her opinion has been relegated to the “no one cares” realm. This time she’s added her two cents, declaring “no national emergency” at our Southern border during a recent interview. “I just don’t think you should call national emergencies unless there truly is a national emergency. There’s no national emergency at our border.” Her remarks are, of course, in response to President Donald Trump’s ultimatum to Nancy Pelosi and the political Left to fund the border wall by Friday, Feb. 15. If they fail to do so, he has promised to declare a national emergency to secure the funding and do it without the political headache. The next four days are going to be interesting.
Here’s more from Breitbart…
Sunday on Showtime’s, “The Circus” former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said President Donald Trump should not declare a national emergency to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border because she argued there was “no national emergency at our border.”
Clinton said, “I just don’t think you should call national emergencies unless there truly is a national emergency. There’s no national emergency at our border. And he’s frustrated because he can’t even get his own party to support his request. And he shouldn’t be breaking new ground and causing new precedents that really may come back to not only haunt him, but our country. He should go through regular order. He couldn’t get Congress when he had Republican control. He can’t get it now. Then work with Congress. Every Democrat, every Republican wants to do what is right to secure our border. They disagree with his demand that there is only one way to do that.”