Title :
link :
http://ift.tt/2t3211e
.BLOGSPOT. COM
For Fri. Dec. 1, 2017
~All Gave Some~Some Gave
All~God Bless America
White House 2017
The Racist is Elizabeth Warren
The liberal senator, not Trump, is the one who needs to apologize
By JEFF KUHNER
The liberal senator, not Trump, is the one who needs to apologize
By JEFF KUHNER
Sen. Elizabeth Warren is playing the victim—again. This time, the Massachusetts Democrat says President Trump used a “racial slur” against her and all Native American Indians when he called her “Pocahontas” at a ceremony honoring the Navajo code talkers.
She is wrong. Memo to Warren: One has to actually be of Native American ancestry for the term “Pocahontas” to be offensive. She doesn’t have a drop of Cherokee blood. In fact, the only racist is Warren. The only one who needs to apologize is Liarwatha.
Warren exploited the plight of Native American Indians and brazenly lied to advance her career. She took advantage of a minority set-aside program in academia by fabricating a false Cherokee identity, effectively stealing a job from real Native Americans. At Harvard, she claimed to be a “person of color” to attain a tenured teaching position—one that paid $350,000-a-year to teach one course. In short, Warren is a con artist, who lined her pockets at the expense of Native Americans. And when finally confronted about her scam during the 2012 election, Warren said her aunt told her she was of Cherokee descent. What was the proof? “Look at my high cheek bones,” Warren said.
She is a vile anti-Indian bigot. Not only did Warren use the historic suffering of Native Americans to enrich herself. But to justify her scam she played to a vicious stereotype: The facial features of Native Americans. For example, imagine if I falsely claimed to be black or Asian to take advantage of affirmative action. And when confronted about my bogus racial heritage, I pointed to certain facial traits—my lips, nose or eye structure—as my only proof. The immediate reaction would be swift and merciless: I would (rightly) be run out of town as a racist, a liar and a poseur. The only reason Fauxcahontas hasn’t is because she is a progressive feminist, who liberals hope will be the Democratic presidential nominee in 2020. In their eyes, her politics excuses her racism, mendacity and sleaziness.
It has been forgotten, but when the scandal first broke about Warren being a fake Indian she initially claimed she had no idea why Harvard had touted her as a Native American. Then it was revealed that Liarwatha had herself claimed on the application documents that she was of Cherokee heritage. No genealogist has ever proved her alleged Indian ancestry. The Cherokees themselves say she is a liar and a fraud. After her election in 2012, she refused to register as a Native American in the U.S. Senate. In other words, Warren herself knows she is anything but a Cherokee Indian.
Yet, Fauxcahontas could easily and definitively resolve this issue: take a DNA test. She won’t. The reason is simple: It would show what everyone knows—Warren is white. It would destroy her career and credibility. So, she continues to pretend to be a Native American and her liberal media allies continue to turn a blind eye. This strategy, however, will not work. The voters of America are not like the Moonbats of Massachusetts. They despise a pathological liar and shameless opportunist.
The problem with Warren is she lies about everything—not just her Indian ancestry. She has lied about her humble roots; her years as a house-flipper and greedy speculator; her lucrative work as a shill for Goldman Sachs, big banks and big insurance companies; her vast personal wealth, which is now over $15 million; her luxurious mansion in Cambridge; her disastrous performance at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau; her absence of legislative accomplishments in the Senate; and her ridiculous claims about being sexually harassed by a colleague at the University of Houston. This is why Fauxcahontas will never be president. She is not just an incorrigible liar. She is a bad one. Her lies are obvious. Warren may talk like Bernie, but she acts like Hillary. And like Hillary Clinton, Warren’s self-righteous hypocrisy has made her detested and despised.
By calling her “Pocahontas,” Trump has brilliantly branded Warren. And by taking the bait, she swallowed it hook, line and sinker. Trump has exposed her as a phony and a poseur. He obviously views her as a potential opponent in 2020. Hence, he has launched a preemptive strike. If Warren is smart, she would ignore Trump’s attacks. Instead, she continues to play the race card. And it will lead to her own trail of tears.
News You Can Use
By Onan Coca
New web site, you can follow the news right here. Enjoy...Helen and Moe.
Good Morning! We here at Constitution.com want you to get your day started right, which is why we’ve decided to help you catch the morning’s news highlights. We know that you’ve got a busy day ahead and you may not necessarily have time to surf the web looking for the things you need to know, so we’ve gone ahead and done that for you.
We’ve gathered a short list of some of what we think are the most important headlines of the day and placed them all right here for you.
So without further ado, here’s the News you can Use for Wednesday.
The GOP tax plan gives relief to a group that’s been mostly forgotten – the millennials.
President Trump is right in the argument with Democrats over the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
Did you hear about that mass shooting in Florida? No? That’s because a good guy with a gun was there to stop it before it happened.
Veteran journalist Cokie Roberts says that ‘everybody knew’ about John Conyers ugly sexual behavior.
Project Veritas and James O’Keefe tried to catch the Washington Post being biased against the GOP and perhaps even making up some anti-GOP stories… but alas, their plot failed and they were found out.
Ouch. The New York Post just destroyed Lena Dunham, deriding her HBO show as a “sluttier,” “less funny,” “less intelligent,” “younger” version of Sex and the City.
After Al Franken and John Conyers, Democrats are struggling with how to deal with their anti-harassment message.
Conservative pundit Ben Shapiro just roasted leftwing actress Debra Messing after she threw a tantrum on Twitter.
Some Americans were attacked with a “sonic weapon” while in Uzbekistan, raising suspicions of Russian involvement in the attacks on Americans in Cuba.
Mike Rowe Makes Shock Announcement, Conservatives Are Cheering
William Widener
Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN), founded in 1973, is considered the largest Christian television network. It features a wide array of programming and Christian films across six networks. They are now adding a huge star to their lineup, in a move that will delight their viewers.
As The Daily Caller reported, CBN is adding Mike Rowe to their network lineup. Rowe’s wildly popular show, titled, Somebody’s Gotta Do It will air in the 9 PM slot in TBN’s regular lineup.
Somebody’s Gotta Do It will begin airing Saturday, December 2nd, at 9 PM. It will follow the 8 PM show of former-Governor Mike Huckabee (R-AR). The first season of Rowe’s show will include 13 half-hour episodes.
Rowe issued a statement following the TBN announcement, saying: “I’m really excited that ‘Somebody’s Gotta Do It’ has found a new home. The people we feature on this show are exactly what the country needs right now–real and regular folks with a genuine sense of humor, a genuine passion for what they do, and a genuine desire to share that passion with America,” Rowe said. “There’s just no way you can watch this show and not feel better about the species, and I know the TBN audience will love the people who ‘gotta do it.’”
Somebody’s Gotta Do It was formerly a part of CNN. The show features Rowe traveling across the country to meet with hardworking Americans, highlighting the lives of people who “do what they do because of a weird mix of love, compulsion, obsession, dedication – whatever it is.”
However, Rowe said that the TBN version of the show will have some changes in format that differ from how it appeared on CNN.
Rowe explained, “this not the same show that aired on CNN. For starters, we’ve cut the episodes down to half-hours. Instead of three segments over the course of sixty minutes, we now have one segment over the course of thirty. That makes a huge difference. It gives us more time to get to know the people we meet and tell each story at a more relaxed pace. Hence, there’s more room for little moments, (or perhaps, not so little) – like saying grace at the kitchen table.”
He added, “We’ve also added new music, new narration, and a few new edits to address some network concerns with my predilection for naughty words and frosty beverages.”
Some had questioned whether the show’s move to a Christian network is indicative of Rowe’s faith.
“Bottom line, Somebody’s Gotta Do It is a family-friendly romp that celebrates regular people doing something they love,” Rowe stated. “It’s not a ‘religious program,’ but it does feature people who have answered a call of some kind, and I’ve tried to emphasize the wisdom of heeding that call in every episode. In truth, that’s what inspired the show in the first place, and I’m hopeful the TBN audience will like it.”
Rowe had received criticism from liberals for his common sense views on jobs and education. He is an advocate of technical schools and job training instead of expensive higher education degrees. He founded “mikeroweWORKS,” a nonprofit charity that provides scholarships to individuals who pursue job training for in-demand skilled trades that university-educated people stray away from. The charity also spreads advocacy for “the country’s dysfunctional relationship with work, highlighting the widening skills gap, and challenging the persistent belief that a four-year degree is automatically the best path for the most people.”
Mike Rowe is a friend of the work ethic and self-responsibility that is consistent among Christians and conservatives. It’s unsurprising that his show made it to TBN, where it will likely resonate louder with viewers than any other network.
FBI Cover up Exposed: 30 Hidden Clinton-Lynch Tarmac Docs Found
BY BEN MARQUIS
In late June of 2016, a now infamous and suspicious meeting on the tarmac of the Phoenix airport was held between former President Bill Clinton and then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch.That meeting occurred just days prior to then-FBI Director James Comey’s announcement that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would not face criminal charges related to her private email server scandal, even as it was admitted that she was in violation of the law.
At the time, the Obama administration — parroted by the liberal media — assured the American public that nothing of consequence was discussed in that tarmac meeting, literally nothing more than a conversation about golf and grandchildren. But not everybody bought that story, as noted by Zero Hedge.
In fact, a number of responsible journalists and watchdog groups filed Freedom of Information Act requests with the Justice Department and the FBI to obtain any and all documents related to the tarmac meeting.
In fact, a number of responsible journalists and watchdog groups filed Freedom of Information Act requests with the Justice Department and the FBI to obtain any and all documents related to the tarmac meeting.
It was hoped that the exposure of such documents would reveal whether the meeting really was as innocent as claimed, or if it bore any relation to the then-ongoing investigation into then-Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s highly questionable email practices.
Shortly thereafter, the FBI declared that they had no documents whatsoever related to the tarmac meeting, but that declaration has since turned out to be untrue.
Watchdog group Judicial Watch announced in October that they had been informed that, lo and behold, the FBI had suddenly discovered 30 pages of documents related to the tarmac meeting, which would be turned over for public release by the end of November.
However, it appears that admission only came due to a similar FOIA request filed with the Justice Department which did result in tarmac meeting documents being turned over — as well as the “discovery” of the FBI documents that initially were declared nonexistent.
“The FBI is out of control. It is stunning that the FBI ‘found’ these Clinton-Lynch tarmac records only after we caught the agency hiding them in another lawsuit,” stated Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch.
“Judicial Watch will continue to press for answers about the FBI’s document games in court. In the meantime, the FBI should stop the stonewall and release these new records immediately,” he added.
The documents, slated to be released Nov. 30, could provide further insight into the FBI’s investigation of Clinton’s email scandal, and may even force the release of their investigative file.
Furthermore, it could show that Clinton and some of her associates were granted preferential treatment by the investigative agency, most notably the immunity agreements that were reportedly handed out to a number of individuals in exchange for their testimony.
However, while many people anxiously await the release of these previously “hidden” documents, not everyone is expecting to find any bombshell information within them, such as noted investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson.
In my experience, the fed agencies typically only hand over what they think you already know about or have. Little confidence we ever get all the public docs we're really entitled to. https://twitter.com/JudicialWatch/status/934912148139945984 …
6:19 PM - Nov 26, 2017
Perhaps Attkisson’s view is a bit jaded and cynical … but then again she has plenty of experience when it comes to being given the runaround by federal agencies during the Obama administration era. Maybe this release will restore a bit of her faith in what is supposed to be a transparent government.
Dershowitz: Trump Needs to Aggressively Challenge Mueller
Special counsel is on a dubious fishing expedition, Harvard Law professor tells 'The Ingraham Angle'
by Jim Stinson
President Donald Trump’s attorneys are not being aggressive enough with the Justice Department’s special counsel investigating Russian hacking into the 2016 presidential campaign, says one of the nation’s top defense attorneys.
Robert Mueller is the special counsel investigating Russian hacking, and that involves looking into alleged ties between Trump’s campaign and the Russian government.
Alan Dershowitz, a Harvard Law professor for 50 years, told Laura Ingraham on Tuesday night's edition of "The Ingraham Angle" that Trump's personal attorneys should be reining in Mueller.
One example Dershowitz gave was Mueller's investigation of Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, who advised Trump during the campaign and the transition. Kushner is being questioned on Israeli policy, the professor said.
"They should be in court challenging what Mueller has been doing," Dershowitz said on the Fox News show. "He is going so far beyond any possible scope of his investigation. For example, there were reports ... that they were investigating whether or not Jared Kushner tried to get the United States to change its policy toward Israel — the resolution condemning Israel for occupying the Western Wall, the holiest place in Judaism. Let's assume that Jared Kushner did that. He should be praised for it. There is nothing criminal about that. What is Mueller doing investigating whether or not somebody during the transition was trying to influence American foreign policy to the benefit of the American people?"
Dershowitz said the Trump attorneys should be objecting to the scope of the investigation and challenging subpoenas.
Mueller was given a narrow scope, not a broad one, by the U.S. deputy attorney general, Dershowitz told Ingraham. And Dershowitz has long noted that "collusion" with a foreign state on campaign issues is not a crime.
"This is supposed to be a narrow investigation about whether or not there was illegal, unlawful collusion with Russia," said Dershowitz. "Collusion itself is not a crime. But now they are going after people for the equivalent of jaywalking. Did they sign the right form? Did they include this in the form? It's all an attempt to try to squeeze them into testifying against the Oval Office."
Dershowitz said reports that Michael Flynn, Trump's former national security adviser, is now cooperating with Mueller is not impressive. Flynn was forced to resign by Trump on February 13 for misleading the vice president pertaining to a call, during the transition, with the Russian ambassador.
Dershowitz said Flynn is trying to get out of trouble, but he likely has nothing to say about Trump and Russia.
"What his lawyer ... is doing is offering his client for sale, or at least for rent," said Dershowitz. "He is saying he is up for grabs. If the Trump administration wants him, they can have him. Give him the pardon. If the Trump administration doesn't give him a pardon, we are available to make a deal with the special counsel. I don't think the special counsel is ready to make a deal yet. It's not clear that Flynn has anything to offer. First of all, his credibility is worthless. He has already been accused of perjury. Second, he is a witness that has already been bought or rented."
Flynn's troubled legal status would make it easy for Trump's attorneys to bash him on the stand, Dershowitz said, thus making reports of a deal doubtful.
"Any decent defense attorney could shred him by saying that he will sell you his mother," said Dershowitz. "He is trying to save his son, he is trying to save himself ... I don't think we are anywhere close to ... a deal with Mueller."
Robert Mueller is the special counsel investigating Russian hacking, and that involves looking into alleged ties between Trump’s campaign and the Russian government.
Alan Dershowitz, a Harvard Law professor for 50 years, told Laura Ingraham on Tuesday night's edition of "The Ingraham Angle" that Trump's personal attorneys should be reining in Mueller.
One example Dershowitz gave was Mueller's investigation of Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, who advised Trump during the campaign and the transition. Kushner is being questioned on Israeli policy, the professor said.
"They should be in court challenging what Mueller has been doing," Dershowitz said on the Fox News show. "He is going so far beyond any possible scope of his investigation. For example, there were reports ... that they were investigating whether or not Jared Kushner tried to get the United States to change its policy toward Israel — the resolution condemning Israel for occupying the Western Wall, the holiest place in Judaism. Let's assume that Jared Kushner did that. He should be praised for it. There is nothing criminal about that. What is Mueller doing investigating whether or not somebody during the transition was trying to influence American foreign policy to the benefit of the American people?"
Dershowitz said the Trump attorneys should be objecting to the scope of the investigation and challenging subpoenas.
Mueller was given a narrow scope, not a broad one, by the U.S. deputy attorney general, Dershowitz told Ingraham. And Dershowitz has long noted that "collusion" with a foreign state on campaign issues is not a crime.
"This is supposed to be a narrow investigation about whether or not there was illegal, unlawful collusion with Russia," said Dershowitz. "Collusion itself is not a crime. But now they are going after people for the equivalent of jaywalking. Did they sign the right form? Did they include this in the form? It's all an attempt to try to squeeze them into testifying against the Oval Office."
Dershowitz said reports that Michael Flynn, Trump's former national security adviser, is now cooperating with Mueller is not impressive. Flynn was forced to resign by Trump on February 13 for misleading the vice president pertaining to a call, during the transition, with the Russian ambassador.
Dershowitz said Flynn is trying to get out of trouble, but he likely has nothing to say about Trump and Russia.
"What his lawyer ... is doing is offering his client for sale, or at least for rent," said Dershowitz. "He is saying he is up for grabs. If the Trump administration wants him, they can have him. Give him the pardon. If the Trump administration doesn't give him a pardon, we are available to make a deal with the special counsel. I don't think the special counsel is ready to make a deal yet. It's not clear that Flynn has anything to offer. First of all, his credibility is worthless. He has already been accused of perjury. Second, he is a witness that has already been bought or rented."
Flynn's troubled legal status would make it easy for Trump's attorneys to bash him on the stand, Dershowitz said, thus making reports of a deal doubtful.
"Any decent defense attorney could shred him by saying that he will sell you his mother," said Dershowitz. "He is trying to save his son, he is trying to save himself ... I don't think we are anywhere close to ... a deal with Mueller."
Angela Lansbury: Women ‘Must Sometimes Take Blame’ for Sexual Harassment
AP Photo/Rick Rycroft
Screen legend Dame Angela Lansbury says women must sometimes “take the blame” for sexual harassment or assault they experience because they constantly work hard to make themselves look attractive to men.
The 92-year-old former Murder, She Wrote star told the Radio Times in an interview Tuesday that there are “two sides” to the coin when it comes to sexual harassment.
“We have to own up to the fact that women, since time immemorial, have gone out of their way to make themselves attractive. And unfortunately it has backfired on us – and this is where we are today,” Lansbury said, according to the Telegraph.
“We must sometimes take blame, women. I really do think that,” she added. “Although it’s awful to say we can’t make ourselves look as attractive as possible without being knocked down and raped.”
Lansbury’s comments come as dozens of men in Hollywood have been accused of various forms of sexual harassment, assault, and rape in recent weeks. The wave of allegations against prominent figures in entertainment and media — which include claims against director-producer Brett Ratner, actor Jeremy Piven, and newsman Charlie Rose, among numerous others — was first sparked by a New York Times report detailing decades’ worth of assault allegations against now-disgraced film producer Harvey Weinstein.
The six-time Golden Globe-winner told Radio Times she never experienced harassment herself while coming up through the Hollywood studio system in the 1940s, but also stressed that individual women were not to blame for their own victimization.
“Should women be prepared for this? No, they shouldn’t have to be. There’s no excuse for that,” she said. “And I think it will stop now. It will have to. I think a lot of men must be very worried at this point.”
Lansbury’s comments drew condemnation from some social media users, as well as from the women’s advocacy group Rape Crisis England & Wales.
“It is a deeply unhelpful myth that rape and other forms of sexual violence are caused or ‘provoked’ by women’s sexuality or ‘attractiveness,'” the group said in a statement Tuesday.
Follow Daniel Nussbaum on Twitter: @dznussbaum
Denzel Washington: Positive Change Black Community 'Starts in the Home
BY TOM KNIGHTON
Actor Denzel Washington attends a special screening of "Roman J. Israel, Esq." at the Henry R. Luce Auditorium on Monday, Nov. 20, 2017, in New York. (Photo by Evan Agostini/Invision/AP)
Denzel isn't just one of the most established black actors in Hollywood. He's one of the most established actors, period. As such, he probably has the leeway to confront Hollywood's enforced Leftism that most actors do not have.
In an interview, Washington told The Grio where positive change in the black community needs to start: "It starts in the home," the actor said. He went on to argue:
If the father is not in the home the boy will find a father in the streets. I saw it in my generation and every generation before me, and every one since.
Washington isn't talking about boys finding a literal father figure to guide them on the right path. He's talking about the streets themselves raising kids, and that path is nothing but trouble:
If the streets raise you, then the judge becomes your mother and prison becomes your home.
Washington is right, of course. Next to slavery, the greatest sin committed by the Democratic Party was the destruction of the black family by LBJ's supposed "War on Poverty." It created a perverse financial incentive for America's black population -- the largest recipients of LBJ's programs at the time, still poor due to Jim Crow laws just being abolished -- to no longer live in family units. Many opted to ignore marriage, as single motherhood led to greater benefits.
A strong family -- with a father and a mother -- does wonders to prevent kids from following in the erstwhile footsteps of many of their peers. In fact, black kids being raised with a married mother and father overcome virtually all of the current differences in outcomes between races.
Denzel Washington clearly understands this. Too bad so many of our politicians don't have the courage to point out the obvious.
Two Familiar Democratic Names Tied To Possible Immigration Scam
JAZZ SHAW
This could get very interesting very quickly. There has been some recurrent talk about a possible 2020 run by former Virginia Governor and long time Clinton ally Terry McAuliffe. But if a recently filed lawsuit gains any sort of traction, trouble may be coming for both families.
The Daily Caller picked up the story of a group of Chinese investors who are suing both McCauliffe and Tony Rodham, brother of Hillary, claiming that they were defrauded in an immigration scam involving a company McAuliffe founded nearly a decade ago. Chinese investors hoping to benefit from the EB-5 visa program dumped more than a half million dollars each into the firm with the expectation that there would be green cards available for them in short order. Now, with the company on the rocks and their immigration status in peril, they feel that they’ve been ripped off.
A group of Chinese investors is suing Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe and the brother of Hillary Clinton, saying they were defrauded of $17 million in a cash-for-green card “scam.”
The investors filed suit in Fairfax Co., Va. circuit court last week, Politico first reported.
The suit alleges that McAuliffe and Clinton’s youngest brother, Anthony Rodham, “exploited” the 32 investors by promising to “leverage…political connections” to ensure that their visa applications “will get to the top of the pile, and then be approved.”
The green cards were to be granted as part of the federal government’s EB-5 visa program. The program grants legal immigration status to foreign nationals who invest at least $500,000 in American companies. Companies must meet certain criteria regarding job creation in order for their investors to qualify for immigration benefits.
It all has to do with GreenTech, which McAuliffe helped found in 2009. At the time he was quoted as saying, “If you have good green projects, there are billions of dollars that are looking for those projects.” He wasn’t kidding. Plenty of federal money flooded into GreenTech and many friendly arrangements were made with people looking to invest, raising plenty of questions about what favors were being done for who.
How Hillary Clinton’s brother got involved is a bit more complicated, but it happened early. Going back a couple of years, Politico was already looking at the connections between Rodham and McCauliffe involving Chinese investment firms in 2015. Rodham was apparently using his contacts to attract investors and making arrangements for them to get what they needed in return.
The lawsuit may or may not succeed on the merits, but it certainly highlights a couple of different problems. First of all, do we have any of these “special” immigration programs which allow certain favored individuals to get head of the line privileges that haven’t wound up mired in scandals? Such deals provide a powerful incentive for people looking to get into the country, and when non-government actors are put in charge of making the arrangements it’s an obvious temptation that opens the door to potential corruption.
Further, the entire green energy industry being heavily subsidized and financed with taxpayer money has led to nothing but problems. McAuliffe was right on the button when he identified the idea that starting up a green technology firm was a great way to attract huge piles of cash. And once again, where large sums of money accumulate, opportunistic individuals will never be far behind.
In the case of GreenTech, we saw both of those worlds intersecting. Chinese investors looking for green cards saw a way to pay the piper in a green technology firm, meeting the requirements to qualify for the program. Were they “ripped off” or is that just the way the capitalist cookie crumbles? The lawsuit may answer that question eventually.
The investors filed suit in Fairfax Co., Va. circuit court last week, Politico first reported.
The suit alleges that McAuliffe and Clinton’s youngest brother, Anthony Rodham, “exploited” the 32 investors by promising to “leverage…political connections” to ensure that their visa applications “will get to the top of the pile, and then be approved.”
The green cards were to be granted as part of the federal government’s EB-5 visa program. The program grants legal immigration status to foreign nationals who invest at least $500,000 in American companies. Companies must meet certain criteria regarding job creation in order for their investors to qualify for immigration benefits.
It all has to do with GreenTech, which McAuliffe helped found in 2009. At the time he was quoted as saying, “If you have good green projects, there are billions of dollars that are looking for those projects.” He wasn’t kidding. Plenty of federal money flooded into GreenTech and many friendly arrangements were made with people looking to invest, raising plenty of questions about what favors were being done for who.
How Hillary Clinton’s brother got involved is a bit more complicated, but it happened early. Going back a couple of years, Politico was already looking at the connections between Rodham and McCauliffe involving Chinese investment firms in 2015. Rodham was apparently using his contacts to attract investors and making arrangements for them to get what they needed in return.
The lawsuit may or may not succeed on the merits, but it certainly highlights a couple of different problems. First of all, do we have any of these “special” immigration programs which allow certain favored individuals to get head of the line privileges that haven’t wound up mired in scandals? Such deals provide a powerful incentive for people looking to get into the country, and when non-government actors are put in charge of making the arrangements it’s an obvious temptation that opens the door to potential corruption.
Further, the entire green energy industry being heavily subsidized and financed with taxpayer money has led to nothing but problems. McAuliffe was right on the button when he identified the idea that starting up a green technology firm was a great way to attract huge piles of cash. And once again, where large sums of money accumulate, opportunistic individuals will never be far behind.
In the case of GreenTech, we saw both of those worlds intersecting. Chinese investors looking for green cards saw a way to pay the piper in a green technology firm, meeting the requirements to qualify for the program. Were they “ripped off” or is that just the way the capitalist cookie crumbles? The lawsuit may answer that question eventually.
Massive Mueller Lawsuit Launched,
This Could End Him
Ben Baker
Special Counsel Robert Mueller has long been criticized for heading the investigation given his apparent biases against President Trump and the internal information leaks.
According to The Hill, the conservative watchdog group Freedom Watch has decided to do something about it. Citing “obvious conflicts of interest among staff” and the leaks regarding “grand jury information,” they are pushing to legally remove Mr. Mueller.
Founder of Freedom Watch, Larry Klayman, filed the complaint with Attorney General Jeff Sessions and FBI Director Christopher Wray, stating: “Robert Mueller is not a ‘man of integrity’ as the Washington, DC, Democrat and Republican political establishment like to spin.”
He goes on to suggest that Mr. Mueller’s primary objective is to see President Trump removed from office: “He is just another pol who is representing his establishment benefactors in both political parties who want to see the presidency of Donald Trump destroyed.”
Many on the Right criticized Mr. Mueller conducting the investigation, given his long-standing friendship with former FBI Director James Comey who President Trump removed from office earlier this year.
Democrats interpreted this action as President Trump’s way of obstructing investigations into whether he colluded with Russia to rig the election in his favor, as the allegations claim. Mr. Mueller was called upon to conduct the investigation in the wake of the Left’s demands and allegations.
Another conflict of interest for the Right is that many on Mr. Mueller’s team are Democrat voters and donors, rather than bipartisan individuals. There is also the worry that Mr. Mueller and his team have extended their investigation well beyond what was originally mandated, deciding to look into President Trump’s personal financial records and business dealings that have no bearing in relation to the allegations.
Perhaps most troubling is that members of Mr. Mueller’s team have been leaking stories to the press obtained through their investigative efforts that are damaging to those being investigated.
Recently, there has also been serious questioning of Mr. Mueller’s capabilities and possibly corrupt dealings. It was discovered that during the time Mr. Mueller was FBI Director, his agency had evidence of Russia resorting to criminal activity to seize control of the United States’ uranium supply.
In spite of this startling discovery, the information was kept secret while the US government under former President Barack Obama agreed to the Uranium One deal, effectively giving over a percentage of the United States’ uranium supply to Russia.
Citing these issues, Mr. Klayman states, “He must be held accountable to the law and should not be able to do as he pleases to further his and his friends, like former FBI Director James Comey’s, political agenda.”
Recently, there has also been serious questioning of Mr. Mueller’s capabilities and possibly corrupt dealings. It was discovered that during the time Mr. Mueller was FBI Director, his agency had evidence of Russia resorting to criminal activity to seize control of the United States’ uranium supply.
In spite of this startling discovery, the information was kept secret while the US government under former President Barack Obama agreed to the Uranium One deal, effectively giving over a percentage of the United States’ uranium supply to Russia.
Citing these issues, Mr. Klayman states, “He must be held accountable to the law and should not be able to do as he pleases to further his and his friends, like former FBI Director James Comey’s, political agenda.”
G’ day…Ciao…
Helen and Moe Lauzier
Thus Article
That's an article
This time, hopefully can give benefits to all of you. well, see you in posting other articles.
You are now reading the article with the link address https://capitalstories.blogspot.com/2017/11/httpift_30.html
0 Response to " "
Post a Comment