CAPITAL STORIES FOR CHILDREN

- Hallo friendsCAPITAL STORIES FOR CHILDREN, In the article you read this time with the title , We have prepared this article for you to read and retrieve information therein. Hopefully the contents of postings Article ADVENTURE, Article ANIMATION, Article LATEST DONGENG, Article WORLD OF ANIMALS, We write this you can understand. Alright, good read.

Title :
link :

WWW.MOEISSUESOFTHEDAY.
BLOGOESPOT.COM
Friday, Dec. 14, 2018
All Gave Some~Some Gave All
*****

Pelosi Launches Personal Attack on Trump

by: TTN Staff

By Quinn Dombrowski from Berkeley, USA (Nancy Pelosi Upload by Anastasiarasputin)

Nancy Pelosi and President Trump got into a heated exchange in the oval office on Tuesday and following the meeting Pelosi thought it was a good idea to attack the president personally.

According to The Daily Wire:

After the contentious meeting on Tuesday between President Trump on one side and House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi and Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer on the other, Pelosi threw a tantrum, mocking Trump and using language that sounded precisely like a bratty schoolchild.

According to The Hill, sources said Pelosi exclaimed, “It was so wild. It goes to show you: You get into a tinkle contest with a skunk, you get tinkle all over you.”

Unsatisfied with just speaking of “tinkling,” though, Pelosi decided to try to rhetorically emasculate Trump about border funding for the wall along the southern border, snapping, “It’s like a manhood thing for him. As if manhood could ever be associated with him. This wall thing.”

Pelosi boasted, “But the fact is we did get him to say, to fully own that the shutdown was his. That was an accomplishment."

The difference of opinion on border wall funding could lead to a shut down of the government this month. Pelosi has decided that personal attacks are the best way to bolster her side of the debate.





THREE CLINTON FOUNDATION WHISTLEBLOWERS TO TESTIFY ABOUT TAX CRIMES, PAY-FOR-PLAY
Allegations made are quite ‘explosive,’ says Rep. Mark Meadows

Zero Hedge

IMAGE CREDITS: MICHEL DU CILLE/THE WASHINGTON POST/GETTY IMAGES.

Following allegations of sloppy accounting, potential tax fraud and pay-to-play, the Clinton Foundation will be under a Congressional microscope this week after three whistleblowers have come forward and agreed to testify – one of whom secretly submitted 6,000 pages of documents to the IRS and FBI in August of 2017, and all three of whom have submitted various documents to Congressional investigators.

Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC), Chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, told Fox News’s Martha MacCallum on Monday night that there are three whistleblowers who have spent the past two years investigating the Clinton Foundation, and have “explosive” allegations which they will share during Thursday testimony on Capitol Hill.

MACCALLUM: OK. With regard to the investigation, which doesn’t get a lot of attention, into the Clinton foundation, the DOJ designated John Huber to look into this. They have 6,000 pages of evidence that they’ve gone through. The foundation raised $2.5 billion, and they’re looking into potential improprieties.

What’s next on this investigation?

MEADOWS: Well, I think for the American people, they want to bring some closure, not just a few sound bites, here or there, so we’re going to be having a hearing this week, not only covering over some of those 6,000 pages that you’re talking about, but hearing directly from three whistleblowers that have actually spent the majority of the last two years investigating this.

Some of the allegations they make are quite explosive, Martha. And as – we just look at the contributions. Now everybody’s focused on the contributions for the Clinton Foundation and what has happened just in the last year. But if you look at it, it had a very strong rise, the minute she was selected as secretary of state. It dipped down when she was no longer there.

And then rose again, when she decided to run for president. So there’s all kinds of allegations of pay-to-play and that kind of thing.

As we noted in late November, the Clinton Foundation has seen donations plummet approximately 90% over a three-year period between 2014 and 2017.

While Hillary Clinton was Obama’s Secretary of State, however, the State Department authorized $151 billion in Pentagon-brokered deals to 16 countries that donated to the Clinton Foundation – a 145% increase in completed sales to those nations over the same time frame during the Bush administration, according to IBTimes.

Meanwhile, John Solomon of The Hill reported on Tuesday that one whistleblower who submitted 6,000 pages of evidence through a firm composed of former federal law enforcement investigators, MDA Analytics LLC., has provided evidence of potential tax crimes as well as a “culture of noncompliance.”

That submission made with the IRS, and eventually provided to the Justice Department in Washington and to the FBI in Little Rock, Arkansas, alleges there is “probable cause” to believe the Clinton Foundation broke federal tax law and possibly owes millions of dollars in tax penalties. That submission and its supporting evidence will be one focus of a GOP-led congressional hearing Thursday in the House.

The foundation strongly denies any wrongdoing. But it acknowledges its own internal legal reviews in 2008 and 2011 cited employee concerns ranging from quid pro quo promises to donors, to improper commingling of personal and charity business. -The Hill

In some instances the Clinton Foundation appears to have misled the IRS, or lied when filling out forms. For example, the Foundation retracted a bid to conduct fundraising in Utah after they refused to correct a filing error which state officials would not allow.

When contacted for comments, the Clinton Foundation admitted their errors, but told Solomon they were akin to “minor traffic violations.”

‘Outnumbered’ explodes over Oval showdown. Faulkner calls out Harf for condescending lecture on how government ‘really works’
Tom Tillison

(Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

Fox News’ “Outnumbered” isn’t known for fiery clashes, but that’s what occurred on Tuesday as Fox News host Harris Faulkner and contributor Marie Harf clashed over the issue of transparency while discussing the “semantics” of a border wall.

Responding to the intense Oval Office meeting earlier in the day between President Donald Trump, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, Faulkner called out Pelosi for the hypocrisy of touting transparency in Congress under her watch, yet not wanting to debate President Trump in front of the media.

“Apparently it can’t be a meeting called by the President of the United States –transparent,” Faulkner said. “Because why? because she’s in it? Because she doesn’t want us to see them going back and forth?”

“No, Harris,” said Harf. “Because the real negotiating on substance does not happen with twenty TV cameras there.”

They go back and forth, with Harf, the former deputy spokesperson for the State Department in the Obama administration, falling back on her 20 years of experience in government to defend Pelosi, while Faulkner accurately noted that her experience did not include sitting down with the president and the leadership of a party.

Still, Harf stressed that she has participated in negotiations.

“In the government, yes, some of it you do publicly. She wanted to get down to brass tacks, what is the President willing to give,” she said of Pelosi.

“How do you know that,” host Melissa Francis challenged.

“Because that’s what a negotiation is about,” Harf replied.

“It’s better when they do in front of the camera and we can see what they are saying,” Francis said.

Harf insisted that it doesn’t work, prompting Faulkner to interject, “It does work.”

“That’s it is not where the real substance of government negotiating gets done,” she said. “Give me an example of one that has actually achieved something. Give me one.”

“I think we just saw it,” Francis replied, referring to the Oval Office meeting.

“Nothing got done!” Harf cried out. “Nothing got agreed to.”

Fox News contributor Lisa Boothe chimed in to add a little perspective when it comes to Pelosi.

“Nancy Pelosi also said that we should be mowing the lawn at the shouter border and that would be a great alternative to the wall and something we should do for border security, so I don’t know if she’s the voice of authority here,” Boothe said.




Tucker Carlson eviscerates Democrats for attempt to remove Trump
by Jerry McCormick

Image Source: Screenshot

Tucker Carlson has released a scathing op-ed to shred the Democrat narrative that Trump has committed a crime.

The real message Democrats are trying send to Americans, according to Carlson, is “Screw you America, and your stupid election. We’re in charge.”

The Actual Facts of the Case

While much of the case against Trump is fantasy, there are actually some facts on which they are based.

However, understanding those facts is what makes this fantasy of impeaching Trump so unrealistic and hypocritical.

Fact 1: Two women shook down Donald Trump during the presidential election for hush money regarding an alleged affair each had with Trump.

Fact 2: Michael Cohen, then Trump’s attorney, paid one of the women out of his pocket, then later requested reimbursement from Trump.

Fact 3: Trump eventually repaid Cohen out of his own pocket, NOT campaign funds.

In essence, Donald Trump was extorted and rather than deal with the negative press during a presidential campaign, he paid the women off out of his own pocket.

Lies and Hypocrisy

If that sounds familiar, all but one aspect of it is very much a regular occurrence.

This happens regularly with our elected representatives, only they have a taxpayer-funded slush fund to pay off people making allegations against them.

Mind you, when those funds were disbursed, payments were NOT made public.

Carlson goes on to make the argument that based on the language Dems are throwing around, any penny spent developing or protecting one’s image must now be considered a campaign contribution, such as new clothing or a haircut.

Dems are in essence trying to change the playbook to suit their narrative while twisting the actual facts of the case.

Sadly, with Democrats soon holding the gavel in Congress, this is all we are going to hear about for the next two years.

Even sadder, money that could be used to lower the deficit, fund our military and its benefits, help the elderly, help the homeless, etc. will now be used to fund a bogus impeachment against Donald Trump.

Much like the Benghazi and email hearings, nothing will ever come of it other than wasting OUR money.

Bush's Finest 30 Seconds: The Willie Horton Ad

Ann Coulter

|

The press in America is even worse than we imagine. We sense that they're biased and stunningly incompetent. They are those things, but so much more. Our media's version of the news is mathematically and precisely the opposite of the truth.

The death and burial of George H.W. Bush is only the latest example.

In the puffery and revisionism that accompany funerals, the man who gave us David Souter, an unnecessary war, tax hikes he promised not to impose and the Americans With Disabilities Act (aka The Destruction of Small Libraries Throughout New England Act) has been elevated to saintlike status.

But the one incident the media decided to excoriate Bush for was, in fact, his finest moment: the Willie Horton ad.

If we let the media get away with this, they will have once again redefined what constitutes acceptable discourse in America and cemented the notion that our political process should never be soiled by such a campaign ad -- the one thing Bush got right in his entire public career.

Far from representing the "low road," the Willie Horton ad was the greatest campaign commercial in political history. The ad was the reason we have political campaigns: It clearly and forcefully highlighted the two presidential candidates' diametrically opposed views on an issue of vital national importance.

Bush's opponent, Gov. Michael Dukakis of Massachusetts, had championed a self-evidently insane criminal justice program that provided prison furloughs to first-degree murderers.

One of the murderers let out under Dukakis' program was a career violent criminal, Willie Horton. In 1974, Horton sliced up a 17-year-old convenience store clerk, Joey Fournier, in Lawrence, Massachusetts, after Fournier had already handed over all the money. He then stuffed the boy's corpse in a garbage can. That wasn't Horton's first offense: Years earlier, he'd been convicted of attempted murder for stabbing a man in South Carolina.

No sane person would have allowed Horton to take a breath of free air again.

Horton was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole, which was the maximum possible penalty, inasmuch as Gov. Dukakis had vetoed the death penalty. The whole idea of sentencing first-degree murderers to life without parole is that they are never supposed to be let out of prison. But under the weekend furlough program lustily promoted by Dukakis, Horton was released.

On April 3, 1987, months after running away from his most recent furlough, Horton broke into the Maryland home of Cliff Barnes and his fiancee, Angela Miller, and waited for them to return. When Barnes got home, Horton lunged at him, dragged him to the basement, tied him up, and spent hours torturing him, slashing him and jamming a pistol butt in his mouth and eyes. He told Barnes he planned to hang him and watch him die.

Five hours later, Barnes' fiance came home. Horton left Barnes bound and gagged in the basement, went upstairs and repeatedly raped and beat Miller, as Barnes listened helplessly from the basement.

Twelve hours after he had first encountered Horton, Barnes managed to escape. When Horton realized Barnes was gone, he stole the couple's car and led police on a high-speed chase before finally being captured -- again.

The Maryland judge who sentenced Horton refused to send him back to Massachusetts, saying: "I'm not prepared to take the chance that Mr. Horton might again be furloughed or otherwise released."

The following year, Michael Dukakis offered himself up to be president of the United States.

Dukakis was directly responsible for Horton's release -- as well as the release of hundreds of other murderers, many of whom went on to commit similarly heinous crimes. Even Dukakis' own Democratic legislature in liberal Massachusetts had tried to reverse a state Supreme Court decision granting furloughs to first-degree murderers.

But the Greek homunculus vetoed the bill.

When Horton's survivors Barnes and Miller tried to meet with Dukakis after their ordeal to ask him to rescind the furlough policy, he refused to see them, arrogantly announcing, "I don't see any particular value in meeting with people." This marked the first time the media supported a politician's refusal to meet with victims of one of his policies.

What could be more central to a presidential campaign than an ad highlighting how Bush would handle criminal justice issues versus how the elected governor of Massachusetts was at that moment handling them?

Liberals' response was to accuse Republicans of racism because Horton was black, knowing full well that the GOP would have given everything it owned for him to have been white. But it was too important an issue to ignore just because the poster-boy for Dukakis' insane crime policies happened to be black.

Bush's ad was so "racist" it never even showed Horton's picture. Instead, white male actors were shown passing through the "revolving door" of criminal justice.

(An independent group unconnected to the Bush campaign produced an ad seen by 16 people showing Horton -- appalling the press by using his mug shot, rather than his First Communion photo as prescribed by The New York Times' standards and ethics policy for black criminals.)

Liberals smugly cite Bush campaign manager Lee Atwater's deathbed apology for the Horton ad. Yes, he hoped for a nice obituary and didn't want his kids teased at school, so he said whatever his captors wanted him to say. (By the way, it didn't work.)

Just like Atwater, the reporter who won a Pulitzer Prize for her articles on Horton disavowed her own reporting, after going through the media's re-education camp.

You don't have the right to "apologize" for something you did that's not factually incorrect.

The Horton ad was the highest, best form of political campaigning, serving to illustrate stark differences between the candidates on an important policy issue. People should have won awards for that ad. Instead, it became one of the stops on the left's Via Dolorosa of Racism. Idiot Republicans are ashamed of it, thinking the best response is to say: Al Gore brought up Horton first!

Yammering morons don't have any argument against the ad, other than feigned outrage. You're seriously defending the Willie Horton ad?!

Yes I am! It demonstrated that Michael Dukakis should have never been anywhere near a position of power, least of all, the presidency. What's your argument against it?

AFP Photo/CHRIS KLEPONIS

Disgraced former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe tricked Michael Flynn into meeting with FBI agents without having an attorney present, reports the Washington Examiner’s Byron York.

According to the Flynn sentencing documents, to ensure then-national security adviser Flynn was as vulnerable as possible, when McCabe set up the January 24, 2017, meeting between Flynn and two FBI agents, he told Flynn that “the quickest way to get this done was to have a conversation between [Flynn] and the agents only.”

This was just four days after Trump took office.

“I further stated that if LTG Flynn wished to include anyone else in the meeting, like the White House counsel for instance, that I would need to involve the Department of Justice,” McCabe wrote in his own account of what happened on that now fateful day, adding, “[Flynn] stated that this would not be necessary and agreed to meet with the agents without any additional participants.”

According to York, within two hours, both agents had arrived and were questioning Flynn about a phone conversation he had with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. Thanks to wiretaps, the agents already knew what had happened during this call.

So here you have a highly partisan FBI, led by the now-disgraced James Comey, asking Flynn questions they already knew the answers to. If that is not a setup, what is?

On top of that, FBI officials scared Flynn off of bringing in his own attorney by raising the specter of the Department of Justice getting involved.

Somehow, it gets worse…

The “agents did not provide Gen. Flynn with a warning of the penalties for making a false statement under 18 U.S.C. 1001 before, during, or after the interview,” according to the sentencing memo.

The reason for this is that McCabe and other FBI officials “decided the agents would not warn Flynn that it was a crime to lie during an FBI interview because they wanted Flynn to be relaxed, and they were concerned that giving the warnings might adversely affect the rapport.”

According to the report the agents filed, Flynn was “unguarded” during interviews and “clearly saw the FBI agents as allies.”

In fact, Flynn was so “relaxed and jocular,” he graciously offered the agents a tour of the White House.

Flynn has since pleaded guilty to lying during this interview and will be sentenced December 18.

But, according to Comey, in their initial reports, the FBI agents did not believe Flynn had lied to them. This all apparently changed after special counsel Robert Mueller took over the Russian collusion witch hunt.

York points out what he calls “one striking detail” found in the sentencing memo’s footnotes: “the 302 [FBI agent] report cited was dated Aug. 22, 2017 — nearly seven months after the Flynn interview. It is not clear why the report would be written so long after the interview itself.”

York also points out that Flynn’s lawyer believes his client was “surprised, rushed, not warned of the context or seriousness of the questioning, and discouraged from having a lawyer present.”

Of course, he was. That was the whole plan. It was a gotcha interview conducted by a corrupt Deep State out to destroy Flynn’s White House career and then move up the chain to the real goal — a coup against President Trump.

In other words, knowing Flynn was a distinguished 30-year military man and not a politician or attorney, led by dirty cop McCabe, the corrupt FBI set him up for a perjury trap. Many believe Mueller, another dirty cop, was able to convince Flynn to plead guilty by threatening Flynn’s grown son.

McCabe was fired by the FBI in March and could face charges of his own after an inspector general report claimed he lied to internal investigators.

Mueller is recommending no jail time for Flynn, thanks to the retired general’s cooperation with the Russian collusion hoax.

Nevertheless, there are two reasons to believe Flynn’s cooperation with Mueller is not terribly damaging to Trump. Were it, Flynn would need to be a witness against Trump, and you do not have your witness sentenced before he testifies. Secondly, you don’t undermine your own witness’s credibility by indicting him for, of all things, lying.

Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC.




‘Classic entrapment.’ Gorka sets internet ablaze with suggestion for Trump: Pardon Flynn and make him Chief of Staff

Vivek Saxena

(YouTube Screenshot)

New information regarding the Justice Department’s investigation and treatment of former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn suggests he’s not a guilty criminal but rather a victim of “classic entrapment,” argues former Trump administration official Sebastian Gorka.

“If you listen to the testimony of the two FBI agents who don’t think he was lying, if you look at what we now know about McCabe, who said, ‘You don’t need a lawyer, Gen. Flynn. This is just an innocuous discussion,'” he said Wednesday evening on Fox News‘ “Hannity.”

“And then what do they do? They trap him in a process crime. Everybody watching this show right now could be trapped in a processed crime. I don’t care how much of a boy scout you’ve been — everyone has a faulty memory.”

“And you say one thing on Monday when you think you’re in a friendly discussion with some fellow patriots, and then a week later you remember things differently. That’s it. You’ve committed a felony because you lied to federal agents. That’s entrapment.”

Though Flynn pleaded guilty last year to lying to federal authorities about otherwise perfectly legal discussions he had with Russian officials during President Donald Trump’s transition to power in late 2016, the evidence suggests he never actually lied but rather was coerced into admitting otherwise.

And he was reportedly coerced into admitting otherwise after first being persuaded by then-FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe to not have an attorney present while being questioned, according to a court filing submitted earlier Wednesday by Flynn’s legal team.

Former Rep. Jason Chaffetz concurred with Gorka, adding that the FBI’s apparent mistreatment of the former national security adviser stemmed entirely from its virulently anti-Trump bias.

“My grandfather was a career FBI agent. We have a great affinity for the FBI, but the upper echelon, it is now well documented the bias and the animus that they have,”  he said.

“What’s also very striking to me is the the difference in the way justice was played out, because I was a key player in what was going on in trying to get the truth with Hillary Clinton and her email and the transfer of classified information to a non-classified setting, putting people’s lives in danger.”

Yet the FBI offered Clinton’s closest aides and officials immunity. The bureau likewise chose to not recommend charges be filed against Clinton, despite her recklessness and potential criminal activity.

With Trump’s associates, including his former national security adviser, it’s been an entirely different story:  “It doesn’t feel like we have that equal application of justice,” Chaffetz noted.

After a brief discussion between Gorka, Chaffetz, and Fox News host Sean Hannity about what many believe to be the real crimes committed by Trump’s enemies, including Clinton, the topic then returned to Flynn and his potential fate, which could include a stint in prison.

“The president could pardon general Flynn and he would make a great chief of staff, don’t you think?” Gorka said tongue in cheek, though the idea isn’t actually impossible.

The last the president spoke of a potential pardon for Flynn was last year, when he simply said, “I don’t want to talk about pardons with Michael Flynn yet. We’ll see what happens, let’s see.”

Tucker Carlson Destroyed Nancy Pelosi With One Terrible Secret From Obama’s Past

Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats think they have Donald Trump backed into a corner.

The election results swept the Democrats into power in the House and they believed they could finally force Trump to cave on one big fight.

But then Tucker Carlson destroyed Nancy Pelosi with this terrible secret from Barack Obama’s past.

Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer are due at the White House for a meeting with President Trump.

Funding for the Department of Homeland of Security and other portions of the government is set to expire on December 21.

The flashpoint for a government shutdown is Trump’s demand of five billion dollars for his proposed border wall.

But Nancy Pelosi fears that if she doesn’t engage in scorched earth opposition to Trump’s wall, a challenger on the left could take her on in the January election for Speaker of the House.

So Pelosi began to plant quotes in the press so her caucus would see she was hurling the over-the-top attacks on Trump’s wall.

In one of these press appearances, Pelosi smeared Trump’s wall as “immoral.”

That’s when Tucker Carlson took her to task for this ugly rhetoric.

“Just in case you’re wondering if the new Democratic Congress will fund a wall along our southern border, we have an answer. Incoming Speaker of the House has cleared it up. ‘No chance,’ says Nancy Pelosi.

‘Walls don’t work,’ she explains, and more than that, they’re wrong.

Morally wrong. Watch,” Carlson stated on his show.

Carlson questioned how a leader could claim that a policy to secure her country’s borders violated the laws of morality.

“Now, if you’re familiar with how things work in Washington, you may be wondering: When did morality begin to play a central role in the legislative process? The answer is the day that Nancy Pelosi got ordained. Pelosi is now an archbishop in the church of progress sanctimony,”Carlson continued.

The popular Fox News host demanded to know why Nancy Pelosi nominated herself to be the moral arbiter of all that is right and just in America.

And then Carlson delivered the real knockout blow.

“Weak moral authority. That is not a problem for St. Nancy. Her moral thought is absolute. She is a good person. You, unfortunately, are not.

So pay attention as she explains once again — a border wall is immoral. Well, fine. Far be it for us to question the command of an archbishop. We’ll take her at her word. God hates walls. But if walls are immoral, what about fences? Obama seemed to like them,” Carlson stated.

But Carlson really drove the dagger in deep when he played a clip of a then-Senator Barack Obama supporting the Secure Fences Act of 2006.

In the clip, Obama declares that the legislation would “authorize some badly-needed funding for better fences and better security along our borders.”

Carlson pointed out how Obama once thought border fencing was “badly needed.”

If that was the case, he wondered, then how could Pelosi claim building a wall was immoral?

Finally, Carlson noted that Pelosi actually does believe barriers can work.

She has gate in front of her weekend home to keep trespassers off her property.

“‘Better fences,’ says Obama. “That sounds immoral. What about Israel’s security wall? It’s big and real and very effective. Pelosi supported it, actually. She voted for a resolution defending that wall from U.N. Condemnation. It’s confusing. Must have been before her conversion. But now [that] the walls are definitely immoral, a few obvious theological questions arise.

What about doors? And locks?

How about hedges or security systems or airport checkpoints or anything else that specifically designed to keep some people out? What about the gate in front of Pelosi’s weekend house? Is St. Nancy against all of that? Of course not.”

In only a few short moments, Carlson was able to lay out just how extreme the Democrat Party’s position on illegal immigration has become.

Their leaders cannot support any border security measures without a significant portion of their base accusing them of white supremacy.

As a result, it’s caused elected officials like Pelosi to violently oppose common sense measures that even Barack Obama supported a little more than a decade ago.

Just in case you need a laugh

Remember it takes a college degree to fly a plane, but only a high school diploma to fix one; a reassurance to those of us who fly routinely in our jobs.  After every flight, UPS pilots fill out a form, called a 'gripe sheet,' which tells mechanics about problems with the aircraft. The mechanics correct the problems; document their repairs on the form, and then pilots review the gripe sheets before the next flight.

Never let it be said that ground crews lack a sense of humor.  Here are some actual maintenance complaints submitted by UPS ' pilots (marked with a P) and the solutions recorded (marked with an S) by maintenance engineers.

By the way, UPS is the only major airline that has never, ever, had an accident.

P: Left inside main tire almost needs replacement.
S: Almost replaced left inside main tire.

*

P: Test flight OK, except auto-land very rough.
S: Auto-land not installed on this aircraft.

*

P: Something loose in cockpit
S: Something tightened in cockpit

*

P: Dead bugs on windshield.
S: Live bugs on back-order.

*

P: Autopilot in altitude-hold mode produces a 200 feet per minute descent.
S: Cannot reproduce problem on ground.

*

P: Evidence of leak on right main landing gear.
S: Evidence removed.

*

P: DME volume unbelievably loud.
S: DME volume set to more believable level.

*

P: Friction locks cause throttle levers to stick.
S: That's what friction locks are for.

*

P: IFF inoperative in OFF mode.
S: IFF always inoperative in OFF mode.

*

P: Suspected crack in windshield.
S: Suspect you're right.

*

P: Number 3 engine missing.
S: Engine found on right wing after brief search

*

P: Aircraft handles funny. (I love this one!)
S: Aircraft warned to straighten up, fly right and be serious.

*

P: Target radar hums.
S: Reprogrammed target radar with lyrics.

*

P: Mouse in cockpit.
S: Cat installed.

*

And the best one for last

*

P: Noise coming from under instrument panel. Sounds like a midget pounding on something with a hammer.
S: Took hammer away from midget.

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/2018/12/www_13.html

Tweet

Subscribe to receive free email updates: