On the Whistleblower Kerfuffle, Imagine a Different Scenario

Victor Davis Hanson

"Imagine . . .

"If in early 2015, some White House staffers transcribing confidential presidential calls were disturbed about one conversation that President Obama had with Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif. The two allegedly had confidentially discussed the staggered release of some $1.7 billion in withheld U.S. dollars to Iran — as an understood exchange for the release of 4 American hostages, $400 million of which was to be delivered, in an unmarked cargo plane at night, and in various currencies to Tehran.

"The payments were allegedly to take place in the general context of the ongoing “Iran Deal” nuclear nonproliferation negotiations, and a time when Iranian-funded Hezbollah was staging terrorist operations in Syria and from Lebanon.

"Imagine further that a few of the insider staffers/transcribers talked about their worries over such a quid pro quo and the disconnect between what their president was saying to the Iranians and what the administration was denying to the press. And they were further outraged because such payments were hidden from the public and in apparent violation of US policy prohibiting cash payments for hostage releases.

"At that point, a furious conservative Republican, former CIA analyst, and former Dick Cheney staffer, with ties to a likely 2016 Republican presidential candidate, working in the National Intelligence Program, contacted the staff of Representative Nunes, Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. The latter’s staff then helped to prep and advise the complainant, along with a mostly conservative leaning law firm, before submitting the formal charges to the inspector general.

"The gist of the brief, citing legal precedents, footnoted to often-conservative media, and prepared as a formal legal document, was that the anonymous complainant had heard and learned from anonymous bureaucrats that they in turn had heard the Obama–Zarif call. Such hearsay in the complaint was allowable given that the whistleblower protocols have been mysteriously recently altered to permit such second-hand complaints." . . .

CNN’s LGBT Town Hall Was Progressive Propaganda

Speaking nonsense to power; how the exalted press has descended into the pits. TD

The Federalist

The event held last night by CNN was not a series of town halls, but a pageant of progressive pieties.

"The “historic” LGBT event on CNN for most of last night was billed as a series of town halls with nine Democratic candidates for president. Typically the purpose of a political town hall is to allow voters with a range of views to ask difficult questions exposing differences in candidates’ policies or beliefs. Nothing of the sort happened last night.

"Nine times last night the same basic half hour played itself out over and over again. As former Vice President Joe Biden pointed out early on, there weren’t many differences exposed, with the possible exception of former Congressman Beto O’Rourke promising to end tax breaks for churches, mosques, and synagogues. Instead, what we saw was a ritualistic exercise meant to make every candidate, and moderator, for that matter, accept incredibly progressive shibboleths regarding LGBT issues. It was nothing more than a purity test. They all passed, except for maybe Chris Cuomo.  

"Each of the candidates expressed their fidelity to the belief that gender is not based in biology, but rather on gender expression, with Senator Elizabeth Warren adding that she had been wrong just seven years ago to say that the state should not pay for sex change operations. Each candidate asked supported the idea that every business should be compelled to participate in gay marriage. Given the opportunity, no one offered any opinion of Americans who hold differing views as much more than wrongheaded bigots."  . . .

How Illinois Schools Teach Preschoolers To Celebrate Transgenderism

The Pope’s Pitiful Reign of Error

The American Spectator

. . . Whatever the future of Islam, at least Muslims have enough regard for God to keep Mecca and Medina from turning into Touristville. Not so for FrancisChurch, which is hastening the death of Catholicism by self-indulgence, if not suicide.

"I arrived in Rome this week in anticipation of another defining liberal moment of this pontificate: the Pan-Amazon Synod, Pope Francis’ latest pretext to fiddle with Catholic discipline and doctrine. I haven’t been to the Vatican in some years. It was hardly a golden age under Pope John Paul II and Benedict XVI, but at least back then Vatican City had recognizably Catholic features. Now it looks like the United Nations Plaza.

"As I walked down the hill to the Vatican, from the convent turned inn where I am staying, I noticed graffiti about “comrades” on the walls surrounding it — walls, by the way, far more imposing than Trump’s. One would have to be a criminal with Olympian talents to scale them. Yet what’s the first sculpture one encounters in St. Peter’s Square? A depiction of illegal immigrants, unveiled recently by Pope Francis. The immigrants are huddled together on a kind of ark — certainly not Noah’s, for the sculpture contains almost no religious content, though some interpret a Hasidic Jewish couple on board as Joseph and Mary. The sculpture looks completely out of place, plopped randomly near the arms of Bernini, which now appear more like the forearm of George Soros."
. . . 
"One small example of FrancisChurch’s death wish is the ubiquity of a gay calendar sold in tourist shops throughout the city featuring handsome priests, some in suggestive poses. Women no doubt buy the calendar, but one suspects its primary consumers are the bishops, vocation directors, and clerical colleagues of these priests. I don’t know what is more depressing about the calendar: that the priests would voluntarily pose for it, or that their superiors are likely to buy it. In any case, it is a hideous illustration of a gayed-up religion, screwing around while the Church collapses under the weight of a gay pederasty scandal of epic proportions." . . .

George Neumayr, a contributing editor to The American Spectator, is co-author of No Higher Power: Obama’s War on Religious Freedom.

http://www.terrellaftermath.com/

The Great Triggering  . . . "The facts will come out and supersede this informed speculation, but it's becoming clear that we've found elements of a seditious cabal in the White House that wants to bring Donald Trump down.  Fortunately for us, he's a bare-knuckle street-fighter.  The Left will rue the day it took him on."

Protesters in Minneapolis Physically Attack Trump Supporter After Rally, Chant Anti-Police Slogans

"President Trump’s rally in Minnesota Thursday drew hundreds of protesters, who lit MAGA hats on fire, reportedly threw urine, and attacked a Trump supporter as he left.

"Protesters also clashed with the police, with one “tense” moment when they began chanting “Whose streets? Our streets” and “kill a cop, save a life.” According to Townhall’s Cortey O’Brien, “Blue lives don’t f***ing matter” was also among the anti-police language used." . . .

Left-wing Rioters Attack Trump Supporters Leaving Minneapolis Rally  . . . "The scene was reminiscent of the riot outside a convention center in San Jose in June 2016, when anti-Trump rioters attacked Trump supporters leaving the venue in full view of the media — and Mayor Sam Liccardo blamed Trump.
"Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey proclaimed Thursday as “Love Trumps Hate Day” in the city, in solidarity with protests against Trump. Evidently, however, some of those among the “protesters” felt “hate” trumped “love.' ” . . .

Then they got home, turned on the TV and saw more of the same just on the talk shows.

Will all the violence serve to discourage attendance at Trump rallies?  Rep. Mark Meadows said the protests were an attempt to "intimidate future Trump rally supporters and goers."

Protesters in Minneapolis Physically Attack Trump Supporter After Rally, Chant Anti-Police Slogans  . . . " 'You know inside the arena just a few minutes ago was really lifting up and honoring the law enforcement and and giving them the respect that they're doing," Meadows told Jason Chaffetz, who was filling in on "The Ingraham Angle." "And yet outside a few minutes later, you have just, it appears to be just hostility towards law enforcement and really an unruly crowd.' " . . .

The liberal scheme to get rid of the Electoral College is dangerous

BPR

With all that in mind, does this really make sense? Are we really so dead-set on taking the success and prosperity of America for granted that we’re willing to go down this dangerous road? Maybe we are. In fact, if Texas goes blue, you can be certain that it will be Republicans pushing this idea or something similar. But, as our Founding Fathers realized, it’s dangerous to our Republic and we should be very hesitant to take the sort of risk that moving to a popular vote model would create. 

"From George Washington to Donald Trump, there have been 45 American presidents and out of all the elections they have participated in, there have only been five times where the popular vote did not agree with the electoral college. However, because two of those elections have occurred within the last 20 years (Trump vs. Clinton, Bush vs. Gore), liberals believe we have a crisis on our hands that must be addressed.

"Their plan to address this crisis is called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. The idea is to get 270 electoral votes worth of states to sign up for it and then those states will promise to throw their electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote. 

"Democrats believe this will benefit them, but that is far from assured. Why? Because since the election isn’t decided on the popular vote, Republicans haven’t been competing to win the popular vote. For example, what sense would it have made for Donald Trump to spend major resources in California, New York, New Jersey, and Illinois in 2016? He wasn’t going to win those states and everyone knew it, including Republican voters, millions of whom undoubtedly didn’t bother turning out because of it.

"If the popular vote were to become the standard, Republicans would start spending major amounts of time and money in big liberal states and once that happens, there’s no reason to think that Democrats would have an advantage. In fact, if and when Texas turns blue, it would undoubtedly be to the Republican Party’s advantage to have the election decided by the popular vote." . . .

Sorry Democrats. America does not do star chambers

Don Surber

Now they wish to seek to impeach without an impeachment inquiry. Democrats want to turn talking to a foreign president into an impeachable offense.

"The Daily Mail sized up well where American politics is today.

"It said, "The White House's refusal to cooperate with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's impeachment inquiry has teed up a constitutional clash that will likely leave it up to the Supreme Court to decide whether to compel compliance, experts said Wednesday.

" 'The confrontation – which has only grown more volatile since the release of a whistle-blower's report last month – could very well be on a path akin to United States vs. Nixon – with a series of major and minor figures facing ratcheting pressure of legal fees, not to mention fines and jail – as the branches sort out conflicts.

" 'The stand-off became even more immediate when the White House counsel's office released a blistering letter essentially daring House Democrats to sue, and vowing the White House 'cannot participate in your partisan and unconstitutional inquiry under these circumstances.'"

"There is no grounds for impeachment. President Trump did nothing wrong."
But his innocence has not stopped Democrats before. Why would it stop them now?
Democrats have wasted the last 2 1/2-plus years chasing the Impeachment Fairy rather than accept the results of the 2016 election. They have tried the 25th Amendment, the emoluments clause, and cajoling electors to the Electoral College to change their votes all in a vain effort to overturn the election.

. . .
 The Bluffpeachment  "The current situation in Washington is, in the language of poker, a bluff.  The Democrats are bluffing; they have only weak cards in their hand.  They actually have nothing against Trump.  That's all they have ever had." . . .
"What awaits the president after impeachment?  The answer is...nothing.  Impeachment is a purely political maneuver, and the president remains to fulfill his duties until the end of his term, knowing that the House is unhappy with him.  The last well known example is President Bill Clinton, who was impeached in 1998 (but acquitted by the Senate).  And so what?  Nothing — he continued to work." . . .

Ian Macfarlane

This incident was certainly not one of Biden's better moments

GOLD STAR FATHER Reveals Disgusting Comment Former VP Biden Made To Newly Widowed Daughter-In-Law: It’s “good thing he was surrounded by Secret Service or I’d be in jail”

. . . "Though the ceremony took place in the closing months of Barack Obama’s presidency, this was the first dignified transfer Biden had publicly attended.
"Mike Iubelt told the Washington Examiner that Biden made some highly inappropriate remarks to his family at the Dover ceremony.
“ 'It was a horrible conversation, it was a horrible experience,” Iubelt said.
“ 'I left there feeling worse than I did before he walked through the doors.”
"Biden angered both Iubelt and his son’s mother, Charlotte Loquasto, by allegedly complimenting Tyler’s widow about her looks.
“ 'He told my daughter-in-law [Shelby Iubelt] … that she was too pretty for this to happen to her,” Mike Iubelt recalled." . . .

Biden angered both Iubelt and his son’s mother, Charlotte Loquasto, by allegedly complimenting Tyler’s widow about her looks.

“He told my daughter-in-law [Shelby Iubelt] … that she was too pretty for this to happen to her,” Mike Iubelt recalled.

What makes Fox News's 'Trump impeachment' poll totally unreliable

We have been reminded that early polls cannot be trusted because their main purpose is to influence opinion, not reflect it. Closer to election the pollsters know their reputation depends on their accuracy. TD

Steve McCann  . . . "Polling in modern America has degenerated into a vehicle to create news and headlines and to shape public opinion on an issue or an individual.

"Over the past few days, the lead on every cable news channel and the headline in virtually all newspapers is Fox News claiming in its exclusive poll that 51% of Americans now favor impeachment and removal of President Trump.

"How did the Fox polling unit come up with this number?

"The Fox news polling companies interviewed 1,003 registered voters, ostensibly throughout the length and breadth of the United States.  Many polling companies use either all adult Americans (254 million) or registered voters (158 million in 2016) as their universe for polling.  Obviously, the greater the number of potential people to contact and question, the easier a poll is to complete and to skew a result.  In reality, what matters is who votes in an election.  In 2016, 86% (or 136.6 million) of registered voters cast a vote.  A poll of likely voters would inherently be more reliable but more difficult to achieve.  Currently, only Rasmussen among national polls uses exclusively likely voters and they are among the most reliable." . . .

. . . "The polling firms can manipulate the results by 1) using adults or registered voters, 2) skewing the universe of those polled, and 3) tinkering with the make-up of the questions asked.  As virtually all polling firms are in league with the Democrats and the media, any poll result splashed across the front page of a newspaper or as a major topic of conversation in the electronic media must be assumed to be biased and the end product of manipulation."

Trump Campaign Cites Democrats In Sample, Lack Of Independents To Blast ‘Garbage’ Fox News Poll About Impeachment  . . . “ '51 percent wants Trump impeached and removed from office, another 4 percent want him impeached but not removed, and 40 percent oppose impeachment altogether,” Fox News reported Wednesday, a result that signified a 9 percent jump from July, when the question was last posed." . . .