Title :
link :
WWW.MOEISSUESOFTHEDAY
.BLOGSPOT.COM
Friday, October 19,2018
All Gave Some~Some Gave All
*****
Donald Trump admitted something about Brett Kavanaugh’s accuser that no one could believe
Christine Blasey Ford nearly upended Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation.
Her false allegation of sexual misconduct nearly forced him to withdraw.
But in a recent interview Trump admitted something about her that no one could believe.
CBS’s Lesley Stahl asked Trump about the fake story that he mocked Ford’s Senate testimony.
Ford’s story fell apart because she could not remember any details about when or where Kavanaugh supposedly attacked her.
The media claimed Trump telling the truth about her flimsy story at a campaign rally was “mocking” her.
Trump shut this nonsense down.
The Daily Caller reports:
President Donald Trump defended a recent speech highlighting Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s lack of recollection about an alleged sexual assault by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, in a wide ranging interview on “60 Minutes.”
Trump referenced Ford’s replies of “I don’t know” when pressed during her testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee on where the alleged assault took place, what exact date it took place, and who was in attendance. “I had one beer and that’s the only thing I remember,” the president said, mocking Ford’s concrete recollection of only having had one beer.
“Had I not made that speech, we would not have won. I was just saying she didn’t seem to know anything,” Trump said defiantly to “60 Minutes,” adding, “I didn’t really make fun of her.”
“60 minutes” correspondent Lesley Stahl pressed Trump on whether he believed Ford was lying during her account, to which he replied, “I’m not gonna get into it because we won. It doesn’t matter. We won.”
When Ford testified, pundits thought Kavanaugh was finished.
But Republicans – beginning with Kavanaugh’s testimony – went on the offense.
Ford’s story was not credible.
It was full of holes and she constantly changed her story.
Trump pointing that out helped push the nomination over the finish line.
Bozell & Graham Column: Elizabeth Warren's No 'Woman of Color'
So Sen. Elizabeth Warren has announced she commissioned a DNA test to address her long-standing claims to have Cherokee ancestry. The Boston Globe reported Warren’s DNA analysis “suggests she’s between 1/64th and 1/1,024th Native American.”
The fraction 1/1024 works out to 0.09 percent. So since Sen. Warren is .09 percent Indian, she may now be eligible to own .09 percent of a casino.
There were two ways to understand this story.
Let’s start with some sobering reality. Cherokee Nation spokesman Chuck Hoskin issued an angry statement: “A DNA test is useless to determine tribal citizenship. Current DNA tests do not even distinguish whether a person’s ancestors were indigenous to North or South America...Using a DNA test to lay claim to any connection to the Cherokee Nation or any tribal nation, even vaguely, is inappropriate and wrong.”
Donald Trump had a field day calling her “Pocahontas, sometimes referred to as Elizabeth Warren.” So, too, did millions of others. Her ploy – her “proof” of Indian heritage -- was met by guffaws because it proves just the opposite, and she’s too arrogant to see it.
By her own test, Warren’s ancestry is 95 percent white European. Yet for years, she listed herself as a minority as a college professor. As bizarre as it sounds, the Fordham Law Review carried the sentence “Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995.” Warren even announced she was “Cherokee” in five recipes for a cookbook called Pow Wow Chow.
She insisted in a 2012 debate that “I listed myself as Native American,” based only on her own family’s legends. She wasn’t on any tribal list. She denied she ever used this legend to get a job, but Harvard thought it was “diversifying” the faculty by hiring her.
There’s a word for a person who does this for years, with complete knowledge she had nothing to back it up. It’s “liar.”
Then there’s the second way to understand this story. To the Trump-hating press, preparing for the 2020 presidential campaign, this is all about Trump offensively using the nickname “Pocahontas” to mock Warren’s little Indian game. He had joked he would pay Warren a million dollars for her favorite charity to take a DNA test....if it “shows she’s an Indian.” The DNA test proved she is basically as Indian as we are (and we’re not). But don’t tell the “news” people.
The evening newscasts presented this as Warren’s slam-dunk rebuttal of Trump, who should feel embarrassed for mocking her. “President Trump, who calls her ‘Pocahontas’, has suggested he would pay $1 million to a charity if she took a DNA test to prove her heritage. Tonight, she says it’s time to pay up,” gushed ABC anchor David Muir.
On PBS, NewsHour anchor Judy Woodruff echoed: “Senator Elizabeth Warren released DNA test results today that support her claim of Native American ancestry. They indicate that the Massachusetts Democrat’s ancestor dates back six to 10 generations.”
“Tonight, calling his bluff,” announced NBC reporter Kristen Welker. “After relentless taunts by President Trump over Senator Elizabeth Warren's claims of Native American ancestry...Warren now answering, her campaign releasing a DNA analysis stating there is ‘strong evidence’ the Senator had Native American in her family going back 6-10 generations.”
None of these supportive network evening newscasts – on ABC, CBS, NBC, and PBS – mentioned Warren listing herself as a minority for years as a college professor, and none of them could locate the outrage from the Cherokee Nation. None concluded she is a fraud. If this outbreak of cheerleading for Warren’s rampant dishonesty is going to mark the beginning point of media coverage of the 2020 presidential campaign, it’s off to a dismal start.
The Kavanaugh Effect and the Election
The Kavanaugh Effect and the Election
In the last few days I have been in Seattle, Dallas, and Des Moines.
In airports, on airplanes, in hotels, and in restaurants, I have been approached again and again by people who are glad we stood up for Judge — now Justice — Kavanaugh and took on the Left. Not a single person has been hostile or negative in five days of travel (and Seattle is hardly lacking in liberals).
I do not remember any political event that has so galvanized Americans. More than 20 million people watched Kavanaugh’s tough, aggressive defense of his family and his life, and it clearly had a powerful impact.
The national conversation has clearly continued to build toward a condemnation of the Left and a sense of defending decent people from smears and character assassination.
One startling moment came in Des Moines, when Irene Seuntjens of Ankeny, Iowa walked up to me at the Iowa History Center and announced, “I am a 75 year old lifetime Democrat who switched to Republican, and I am now volunteering for the GOP candidates.” Furthermore, her whole family in Iowa, Georgia, Oregon, and Wisconsin are also now Republican. She said, “the viciousness against Kavanaugh was the last straw. The Democrats are no longer the party of John Kennedy that I belonged to when I was young.”
Irene’s testimonial was reinforced by Merle Miller of Iowa City (home of the University of Iowa and maybe the most liberal town in Iowa) who said, “it comes down to jobs versus mobs.”
The initial polls in state after state have shown a real shift toward the Republicans.
Senator Ted Cruz is pulling away in Texas.
Kevin Cramer has a remarkable lead over incumbent Senator Heidi Heitkamp in North Dakota.
Republican Governor Kim Reynolds has begun to pull away from Democratic candidate Fred Hubbell in the Iowa governor race.
In Tennessee, former Governor Phil Bredesen is beginning to fall behind Republican Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn.
In Arizona, a real gap is opening for Republican Martha McSally, as Democrat Kyrsten Sinema’s own crazy comments have surfaced as a hardline left-winger more suited to Berkeley than Phoenix.
As I am writing this, the Senate race in Nevada has gone from very close (with Democrat Jacky Rosen occasionally ahead by one or two) to Republican Senator Dean Heller gaining a 7-point lead. In West Virginia, Democratic Senator Joe Manchin, the only Democrat to vote to approve Kavanaugh, has seen his re-election tightened up. And just this morning, the Senate Democrats election fund dumped $3 million into New Jersey, suggesting they are worried about Senator Bob Menendez’s race against Republican Bob Hugin.
I think three things relating to Justice Kavanaugh have happened to change the dynamic against the Democrats and for the Republicans.
First, the sheer viciousness of the smears, lies, and character assassination galvanized Republicans who had been relatively passive about the election. Now they are deeply angry about the Democrats’ dishonesty and nastiness. They were especially offended by the Left’s behavior since Kavanaugh has two young daughters who had to endure such personal lies about their father. The Republican base’s energy is dramatically higher than it was two weeks ago.
If ”Remember the Alamo” was a rallying cry for Texans, “Remember Kavanaugh” has become a rallying cry for Republicans.
Second, 2018 has become the year when the mask came off the Democratic Party. On issue after issue, Democrats have become radical advocates of radical policies — policies that they are willing to use radical, coercive actions to force on the American people. Their support for open borders, sanctuary cities, government-run healthcare, higher taxes, bigger government, and endless resistance, investigations, and threats of impeachment have all seemed radical. Their intensely hostile description of their opponents — deplorables, people who consort with evil, people who should be kicked, confronted, driven out of restaurants and stores — these all seem a radical break with the American system. Watching Democratic activists scratch at the Supreme Court doors seems out of control. The behavior of these radical activists is becoming a definer of the Democratic Party — reinforced by incumbent Senate Democrats who are using similar language and tactics in the Senate hearing room. For many Americans the mask is off, and the Democrats have become a frighteningly dangerous party.
Third, the Kavanaugh fight drove home how much politics and government has become a team sport. For weeks it was clear that Kavanaugh was a fight between the McConnell Republican team and the Schumer Democratic team. I first realized how big this shift was when I saw the changing poll numbers in North Dakota and Tennessee. Suddenly voters were saying, “I know who you are—you are on the Schumer team.” There was no middle ground. Democrats like Bredesen or Heitkamp who claim to be “moderate” were shrugged off because their first vote was going to be for the radical party to be in charge.
I am reminded of a special election in Alabama during the Reagan years. The race was very, very close until two things happened. Vice President Bush came to campaign for the Republican candidate and Senator Ted Kennedy came to campaign for the Democrat. Within a week there was a 20-point gap, as all of the undecideds concluded that they did not want to send a “moderate” supported by Ted Kennedy to Washington.
The same team identity test is building and virtually guarantees Republicans will gain seats in the Senate and may keep their majority in the House.
The three Kavanaugh impacts have been dramatically reinforced by President Trump crisscrossing the country to huge, enthusiastic rallies, where he drives home the messages day after day.
The Kavanaugh fight is going to prove to be a major turning point in American politics.
Your Friend,
Newt Gingrich
Newt Gingrich
Obama-Hillary State Department Provided ‘CLEARLY FALSE’ Statements to DERAIL Requests for Clinton EmailGate Scandal Docs, ‘SHOCKED’ Federal Judge Reveals
President Barack Obama used a pseudonym when communicating with then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton by email, while her IT company referred to her email deleting as a “cover-up”, new FBI documents reveal.
The heavily-redacted documents, almost 200 pages, include summaries of interviews with senior Clinton aides concerning the private email server, and brings to light details previously unknown.
During the interview with Huma Abedin, who served as deputy chief of staff under Clinton, the FBI reportedly presented her with an email exchange between Clinton and a person she did not recognize. The FBI then revealed the unknown person’s name was believed to be a pseudonym used by Obama. Abedin reacted by saying, “How is this not classified?”
This exchange could expose Obama as having mislead the public on the issue, given his 2015 statement that he found out about Clinton’s use of a private email server "the same time everybody else learned it, through news reports."
FBI report reveals that Obama used a secret pseudonym to send emails Clinton and these emails ended up on her private server.
The State Department will not make public the emails Clinton exchanged with Obama, citing “presidential communications privilege,” as reason to withhold the emails under the Freedom of Information Act, Politico reports.
The documents also include interview notes with other senior Clinton aides; Cheryl Mills, Jake Sullivan and former Bill Clinton advisor Justin Cooper, who registered the clintonemail.com domain. Romanian hacker Guccifer and a number of state department officials were also interviewed.
The latest FBI document cache also refers to the engineer who used BleachBit to permanently delete emails from Clinton’s server soon after the House Benghazi Committee issued a subpoena for documents relating to the 2012 attack on the US embassy in Libya. According to the engineer, he did this “of his own accord based on his normal practices as an engineer.”
Clinton used BleachBit software to permanently wipe emails.
Documents show employees from Platte River Networks, the IT company who managed Clinton’s emails, referring to a request to wipe emails in 2014 as the “Hilary [sic] cover-up operation”. An employee told the FBI this was a joke.
Clinton aide, Bryan Pagliano, said concerns were raised about whether Clinton’s server created a “federal records retention issue” by state department officials in 2009 or 2010. When he communicated these concerns to Mills, however, she said that Clinton’s predecessor, Colin Powell, had also used private email.
The reports further reveal Clinton’s alleged ineptitude with technology, with aides claiming she “could not use a computer,”and didn’t know her email password.
Abedin said she had two computers in her State Department office, one for unclassified communications and another for classified communications. She did most of her work on the unclassified computer and would go “days or weeks without logging into the classified system.”
One redacted interviewee described himself as a “Clintonista” and said he has a relationship with the Clintons dating back years. He said he would meet with Clinton four or five times a day and initially traveled with her until she was comfortable with the position of secretary of state.
The unnamed interviewee said he only became aware of the server after receiving an email from the address, which he thought was spam. He described Clinton as a “paper person” who preferred using paper over electronic communications.
Clinton’s spokesperson, Brian Fallon, responded to the new revelations by saying the interviews “further demonstrate why the Justice Department believed there was no basis to move forward with this case.”
He also criticized the timing of the release, three days before the first debate, in a tweet. Others also questioned the timing , but for a different reason.
How amazing that 189 pages of FBI docs pertaining to Clinton email probe drop on a Friday afternoon again. I’m sure just a coincidence!
The Trump camp said through advisor Jason Miller, the reference to a cover-up “suggests there was a concerted effort to systematically destroy potentially incriminating information.”
More on Loopy Lizzy…
More on Loopy Lizzy…
In 1993, the Harvard Crimson reported that the “Law School faculty voted yesterday to offer a tenured position to Visiting Professor of Law Elizabeth Warren.”
The article goes on to celebrate that this hiring “marks an advance in the student and faculty effort to improve faculty diversity[.]”
Warren began teaching at Harvard in 1995. Then…
Although the conventional wisdom among students and faculty is that the Law School faculty includes no minority women, Chmura said Professor of Law Elizabeth Warren is Native American.
In response to criticism of the current administration, Chmura pointed to “good progress in recent years.”
According to Chmura, of the 21 professors appointed since 1989, 10 were women or minorities. In addition, all three of last year’s appointees were women.
Then, a 1996 piece in Fordham Law Review celebrated Warren as Harvard Law School’s “first woman of color.”
On top of this, there is also a 1999 Affirmative Action Plan Book published by Harvard that appears to identify Warren as Native American. Her name is not listed, but it could not possibly be anyone else.
This document is important because, as Breitbart News reported at the time, “Harvard is considered a federal contractor, its employment practices fall under the regulation of the Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP).”
This compliance program “requires “a contractor, as a condition of having a federal contract, to engage in a self-analysis for the purpose of discovering any barriers to equal employment opportunity.”
A mere 13 years later, though, during her first run for the U.S. Senate, Warren claimed she had no idea she was being celebrated by her employers as the “first woman of color” or how in the world the school discovered she self-identified as “Native American.”
But the far-left Politico reported in 2012 that “for several years, ending in 1995” Warren “described herself as a minority on a law professors’ listing[.]”
It gets worse.
The Boston Globe, a left-wing news outlet that basically works as a campaign surrogate for Warren, reported Monday that during “her academic career as a law professor, she had her ethnicity changed from white to Native American at the University of Pennsylvania Law School.”
Warren also did the same at “Harvard University Law School, where she was a tenured faculty member starting in 1995.”
On top of all that, back in 1984, Warren not only appeared to plagiarize a recipe for a cookbook titled Pow Wow Chow, she signed her name, “Elizabeth Warren — Cherokee.”
So here is Warren, between 1984 and 1995, parading around as a Native American, as a Cherokee, and doing so in the most public ways possible — in books and in school directories. But in 2012, she says she has no idea how her employers discovered she identified as American Indian or that she was even being celebrated by Harvard as an all-important first in the Diversity Olympics.
And now we know, thanks to numerous documents discovered over the years and a DNA test released Monday, that it was all a lie.
Warren’s DNA test proves she is no more Native than the average white American. In fact, there is a good chance she is even less so. While the average American has .18 percent Native ancestry, Warren could be as low as .1 percent or only as high as a pathetic 1.6 percent.
Moreover, Warren’s DNA was not even compared to Native samples. DNA from Mexico, Peru, and Colombia were used instead. What this means is that Warren might be 1/64 to 1/1024 Mesoamerican, not Indian.
Warren claims family lore convinced her she is Cherokee, but even those claims have proven to be lies.
To begin with, some members of her family vehemently deny any talk of Indian ancestry in the family.
Secondly, and with all the evidence proving the exact opposite, Warren still stands by her claim that her parents were forced to elope due to family strife over her mother being Indian. The only problem with this is that a marriage certificate and contemporaneous news stories show that Warren’s parents were married at a church and the wedding was celebrated in the community.
Finally, Warren points to her great-great-great grandmother as Cherokee, but contemporaneous documents prove this ancestor identified as “white.”
Meanwhile, the same media that spent most of last week questioning Kanye West’s blackness, are now defending a woman — who is anywhere from 63/64 to 1023/1024 white — as vindicated in her identity theft, even as the Cherokee Nation disavows her.
American Bar Association ends review of Brett Kavanaugh
by Jerry McCormick
American Bar Association ends review of Brett Kavanaugh
Democrats have gotten more bad news in the Brett Kavanaugh saga.
The American Bar Association (ABA) has dropped its review of Kavanaugh, who recently took his seat on the Supreme Court after a contentious series of confirmation hearings.
Now that the review is officially over, Kavanaugh’s ABA rating will remain at “well-qualified.”
It’s Over
There is little argument that Kavanaugh’s confirmation was one of the most challenging feats the Trump administration has accomplished.
Prior to the allegations made by Christine Blasey Ford that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her while they were in high school, the ABA had given the judge a “well-qualified” rating.
However, once the allegations were made, the ABA held back its rating so it could review the new information about Kavanaugh.
Democrats were using this piece of information to their advantage, calling for a full investigation on the back of the ABA announcement.
Eventually, Republicans caved and gave the Democrats exactly what they wanted: they held an auxiliary investigation into Kavanaugh based on the new allegations.
But it came back to bite the Dems in a big way.
Not only did the FBI come back with nothing, but the ABA also ended its review of Kavanaugh.
Time to Move Forward
Initially, many people thought there would be significant rioting and protests against Kavanaugh.
Apparently, though, most Americans simply let it go.
While there were some fringe protestors, the numbers were almost non-existent and amazingly, there was little-to-no rioting over his confirmation.
Democrats have vowed to re-open this issue if they win a majority in Congress, but it seems as though most Americans have already put it behind them and want to move forward.
That attitude by the Democrats, however, may end up being their undoing come November.
President Trump Threatens Military Action If Mexico Doesn’t Stop Migrant Caravan, Correctly Blames Democrats for ‘Assault on Our Country’ by Illegals
President Trump said he has spoken to Defense Secretary James Mattis about the U.S. military being used to police the southern border.
"Until we can have a wall with proper security, we are going to be guarding our border with our military. That's a big step," he said at the White House, expressing dismay at a caravan of migrants making their way from Honduras to the U.S. border.
According to a BuzzFeed report, the caravan was organized by People Without Borders. Many planned to apply for asylum at the border in the U.S. or slip in undetected.
Trump said other countries are laughing at the U.S. immigration laws, which he said "are so weak and so pathetic" that the migrants would be allowed to enter. He said under the Obama administration's policies, the migrants could be released into the U.S. with a court date, but that many would never show up to court.
.@POTUS: “Until we have a wall and proper security, we’re going to be guarding our border with the military.”
He then applauded Mexican authorities for breaking up large portions of the caravan as it moved through Mexico.
"They have very strong immigration laws, as we should have," he said, adding the caravan situation "make [him] very sad."
"It's sad for the people in the caravan and it's sad for the people in the United States."
He said asylum-seekers are coached in advance on what to say at the border in order to go before a judge and start the process.
"We cannot have them taken out. We have to bring them before a ridiculous court system," he said during a meeting with Baltic state leaders.
Trump called on Mexico to do more to police its side of the border, threatening to make the issue part of new negotiations on NAFTA.
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/2018/10/www_18.html
0 Response to " "
Post a Comment