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
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.”
Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) jumped headfirst into her utopian plan to destroy America in the name of climate change, now known as the “Green New Deal,” and she had some tough words for critics on the Right, saying they were trying to “mischaracterize” her impossibly ambitious scheme: “…the Right does try to mischaracterize what we’re doing as though it’s like some kind of massive government takeover.” Then on NPR she responded to the question whether or not this requires a massive government takeover: “It does. Yeah, I have no problem saying that.” It may be time for a Democrat intervention.
Here’s more from The Daily Wire…
Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) lied about her “Green New Deal” on Thursday, saying that it is not a “massive government takeover” hours after admitting the exact opposite.
During an interview on MSNBC, Ocasio-Cortez criticized the political Right, saying that the Right was trying to “mischaracterize” her plan.
“One way that the Right does try to mischaracterize what we’re doing as though it’s like some kind of massive government takeover,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “Uh, obviously what we’re trying to do is, well obviously it’s not that because what we’re trying to do is release the investments from the federal government to mobilize those resources across the country.”
Yet this morning, during a radio interview with NPR, Ocasio-Cortez said the exact opposite.
Nuclear energy. Airplanes. Cows. All are on socialist Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s (D-NY) socialist wonderland hit list. The “to-do” wish list is possibly even more absurd and unrealistic. It includes “upgrading all existing buildings in the United States” and guaranteeing economic security for those “unwilling” to work. We kid you not. The vehicle: AOC’s “Green New Deal.” Even more laughable is that AOC has put this pipe dream on a “10-year national mobilization” timetable to achieve. If you want a preview, just look to Venezuela.
Here’s more from PJ Media…
On Thursday, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) unveiled her much-vaunted “Geen New Deal,” and it’s even worse than you expected. Among other absurd things, it calls for abolishing cows, nuclear energy, and airplanes, “upgrading all existing buildings in the United States,” guaranteeing “high-quality health care” for all Americans, and spreading the Green New Deal to other countries. Oh, and it isn’t even technically a bill.
Ocasio-Cortez leaked a copy of the “Green New Deal” to National Public Radio (NPR), and her slipshod work in progress is a resolution. Rather than making law, the resolution states the “sense of the House of Representatives.”
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) slammed the proposal Wednesday, saying, “The green dream or whatever they call it, nobody knows what it is, but they’re for it right?”
The resolution does not lay out specific plans but calls on Congress to “create a Green New Deal,” which will consist of a “10-year national mobilization” yet to be determined.
More than 180 years ago, Georgetown University sold 272 slaves. Starting in the fall of 2020, the Georgetown student government body wants students to establish a fund for the descendants of these slaves with a $27.20 fee per student each semester of attendance. It passed in a 20-4 vote. Students receiving financial aid will have the option to opt out if the measure takes effect after a campuswide vote in April. This is what we call redistributive justice: those who did not sin paying for the sins of their ancestors.
Here’s more from Washington Examiner…
Students at Georgetown University are considering paying reparations for slaves that Georgetown University sold more than 180 years ago.
Earlier this month, the Georgetown student government authorized a campus-wide student referendum that will ask students to establish a fund for the descendants of these 272 slaves. If the referendum passes, a fee would be collected each semester, starting in the fall of 2020.
The semesterly fee proposed is $27.20 per student “in honor of the 272 people sold by Georgetown,” according to the student government resolution approving the referendum, obtained by the College Fix.
Students receiving financial aid will be able to opt out of the reparations payments, according to student news outlet the Hoya.