Displaying posts published in

September 2019

Gregg Jarrett: The Trump whistleblower may not be a whistleblower at all

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/gregg-jarrett-trump-whistleblower

The latest media mass hysteria over a whistleblower’s complaint that, according to FoxNews.com “reportedly involved allegations President Trump made a troubling and unspecified ‘promise’ to a foreign leader,” is based on precious little information.  That has not stopped journalists from convicting Trump in the court of public opinion and predicting his imminent demise.

Who exactly is this unidentified “whistleblower”? What is the specific nature of his or her “urgent concern” complaint against the president?  Does this complaint really qualify under the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act (ICWPA)?  These are just a few of the most fundamental questions that remain largely unknown.

Despite the paucity of facts, some reasonable observations and conclusions can be drawn.

It appears that an American spy in one of our intelligence agencies may have been spying on our own president.  The complaint suggests that this intel agent was listening in on Trump’s conversation with a foreign leader.  Was this person officially asked to listen to the conversation or was he or she secretly listening in? We don’t know.
This agent, who is an unelected and inferior federal employee in the government hierarchy, apparently believes that it is his/her job to second-guess the motivation behind the words of the elected president, who is the most superior officer in the U.S. government. 
Article II of the Constitution gives the president sweeping power to conduct foreign affairs, negotiate with leaders of other nations, make demands or offer promises.  The Constitution does not grant the power of review, approval or disapproval to spies or other unelected officials in the executive branch. 
The ICWPA law defines the parameters of an “urgent concern” complaint as an abuse or violation of law “relating to the funding, administration, or operations of an intelligence activity involving classified information, but does not include differences of opinions concerning public policy matters.”  The president’s conversation with a foreign leader does not seem to fall under this whistleblower definition. 
It appears the acting Director of National Intelligence (DNI) agrees with this assessment. His agency’s general counsel wrote a letter stating the complaint did not meet the ICWPA definition because it involved conduct “from someone outside the intel community and did not relate to intelligence activity,” according to a report by Fox News. This is why the DNI refused to forward the complaint to congress. 

Peter Schweizer: Trump right to question Biden dealings with Ukraine, despite Dem criticism Peter Schweizer By Peter Schweizer

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/peter-schweizer-trump-is-right-to-call-for-probe-o

As Congress and the White House wrestle over a whistleblower’s complaint against President Trump, the story took a new turn late Friday when the Wall Street Journal reported that, in a July phone call, Trump “repeatedly pressured the president of Ukraine” to investigate the dealings of Joe Biden’s family in Ukraine.

Trump’s call is reportedly the source of a complaint by a whistleblower against the president that has sparked a furor among Democrats in Congress, who are demanding to see the complaint.

If, as multiple news organizations are reporting, the whistleblower’s complaint centers on Ukraine, there is strong evidence that it relates to President Trump’s urging the Ukrainian government to investigate Hunter Biden, the former vice president’s son.

The story behind that story is itself worthy of serious scrutiny.

The proposed investigation involves Hunter Biden’s involvement with a controversial Ukrainian natural gas company while then-Vice President Biden was overseeing America’s Ukraine policy.

Critics of the president have accused Trump of attempting to “extort” Ukrainian officials for “dirt” on Biden, the current front-runner for the Democratic nomination to run against Trump next year.

But why would Ukraine have dirt on Joe Biden? For answers, one must look at Burisma, the Ukrainian gas company which, until earlier this year, employed Hunter Biden.

Andrew McCarthy: Was Trump ham-handed in raising Biden allegations? Maybe. But don’t give Biden a pass Andrew McCarthy By Andrew McCarthy

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/trump-biden-pass-andrew-mccarthy

It was in the national interest of the United States that Ukraine, under siege by our Russian nemesis, be given the full quantum of military aid extended by Congress. It was in the political interest of President Trump that Ukraine aggressively investigate credible allegations of corruption and conflict-of-interest against former Vice President Joe Biden, a favorite among the Democratic candidates seeking to run against Trump in 2020.

The national interests of the United States and the political interests of the president are not the same thing. If President Trump conflated them in his discussions with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, that was a failure of judgment.

But have we lost our capacity to say conduct is censurable without turning it into something it is not – such as effective immunity for Biden and grounds for Trump’s impeachment?

Don’t get me wrong. It is not my purpose to minimize the politicization of American foreign relations. To the contrary, I just wrote a book, “Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency.” In many ways, it is a “cri de coeur” for a restoration of a vital American norm. Incumbent administrations must not wield the awesome powers of the presidency, especially the powers to conduct foreign affairs and gather foreign intelligence, out of sheer partisanship.

Let’s say, for argument’s sake, it is proven that Trump used his enormous influence over Kiev, or worse, his control over the release of defense aid Ukraine needs, strictly to better his electoral chances against Biden. That would be an abuse of power.

It would also make the 45th president, well, the 45th president in American history to exercise his powers under the influence of his political standing. That is particularly true of presidents seeking reelection, even if we suspect that most exploitations of foreign relations power for electoral advantage have been less crude than Trump’s alleged squeezing of Ukraine.

Trump Stands Up for Religious Freedom He champions the issue at the U.N. more vigorously than any of his predecessors. By Kelsey Zorzi

https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-stands-up-for-religious-freedom-11569279353

President Trump isn’t known as a champion of human rights, but on Monday he became the first American president to convene a meeting at the United Nations on religious freedom. He kicked off the U.N. General Assembly’s annual session with a “Global Call to Protect Religious Freedom.”

Flanked by Secretary-General António Guterres and Vice President Mike Pence, the president declared: “No right is more fundamental to a peaceful, prosperous, flourishing society than religious freedom, yet it is rare around the world. As we speak, many people of faith are being jailed, murdered, often at the hands of their own government.” More than 80% of the world’s population lived in nations that restrict religious freedom as of 2009, and the situation hasn’t improved, according to Pew Research.

Mr. Trump is also scheduled to hold bilateral meetings with several world leaders, including Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan and Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah Al Sisi. Administration officials say he will speak to them about violations of the human rights of religious minorities, including Christians. Topics will likely include Pakistan’s blasphemy laws and Egypt’s Islamic extremist groups.

Biden’s Real Foreign Election Interference: Russiagate The former vice president was in the thick of the most norm-breaking act in modern political history. Julie Kelly ****

https://amgreatness.com/2019/09/23/bidens-real-foreign-election-interference-russiagate/

It looks as though Joe Biden is about to bumble and babble and bluster his way to a third failed run for president. Even before President Trump took aim at Hunter Biden for his shady financial ties to the Ukraine while his father was vice president, Biden was struggling with basic facts and weird stories about confronting a disobedient black teen with a chain in the 1960s.

Now it looks like Biden might be forced to answer serious questions about how his children capitalized on the former vice president’s international political connections and how Biden himself ran interference when his family’s grift was jeopardized.

According to news reports based on a “whistleblower” complaint, President Trump requested over the summer that Ukraine investigate an energy company that appointed Hunter Biden to its board in 2014, shortly after President Obama named Joe Biden as his emissary to the country.

While details about the younger Biden’s windfall are unclear, The Hill’s John Solomon reported in April that Biden’s company was paid a six-figure sum each month for more than a year. When Ukrainian officials began to probe possible corruption at the company, the vice president pressured the country to halt the investigation and fire the lead prosecutor, even threatening to withhold U.S. aid. (A fact he later bragged about.)

Ukranian officials concurred: That move not only spared Hunter Biden, who continued to serve on the gas company’s board until earlier this year, but quashed another political scandal for the Democrats in advance of an election year.

Thought of the Day “Connecticut – Does it Have a Future?” Sydney Williams

http://swtotd.blogspot.com/

The title of this essay is silly. Of course, Connecticut has a future. The question is, will it be one that strengthens economic development and reassures residents, especially the retired, to continue to live within its borders. Will it still have, as Mr. Burghoff asks, “the people I’ve known,” or will my family and friends move to more favorable environs. Connecticut has been in the vanguard of those states marching to the tunes of “woke” progressives, who put identity politics and income and wealth distribution ahead of personal liberty, opportunity and individual responsibility. The consequence has seen an exodus of people and businesses, a slow-growth economy and per-capita state debt that is fourth highest in the nation.

Hatred permeates the political landscape: The ugly language of those in the media who have called for the decapitation of the President; elected Representatives who use their office to pursue personal vendettas against Mr. Trump and their influence to enrich themselves; presidential candidates who call for an end to all fossil fuels; the promise of free college, a basic income and socialized medicine – in short, President Obama’s 2012 “Life of Julia” – all to be paid for with a wealth tax and higher income taxes, which would stifle innovation and hamper economic growth. Is it possible progressives have overplayed their hand?

There have been signs of spring’s renewal against this bleak, wintery landscape. Michael Bloomberg recently penned an op-ed in the New York Post, “Rage is Destroying Us”: “…political rage seems to be crowding out political engagement.” His column concluded: “Restoring the ability to disagree without becoming mortal enemies is a new and urgent civic imperative.” Richard Cohen, a syndicated columnist for the Washington Post, wrote a week ago that he felt “marooned” within the Democratic Party, that he was “…stuck with a party that would replace the segregation of the past with the segregation of the present.” He wrote of his ideal: “My political party would embrace the uniqueness of every individual and not consider him or her (or any other pronoun)[1] a member of a group first, an individual second and use the excuse of past prejudices to create a racial or ethnic patronage system.” My sentiments exactly; yet both he and Mr. Bloomberg are liberal Democrats who have soured on the progressive tilt of their Party.

Castro’s Torture of American POWs in Vietnam Reflecting on a harrowing untold story — to honor National POW/MIA Recognition Day. Jamie Glazov

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2019/09/castros-torture-american-pows-vietnam-jamie-glazov/

Editors’ note: Last Friday, Sept. 20, 2019, our nation, led by solemnly marked National POW/MIA Recognition Day, during which we honored all American prisoners of war and expressed our deep gratitude and respect for what they endured and — as empirical evidence suggests — in some cases may very well be continuing to endure. Indeed, we pay tribute to those who never returned — and, of course, also to their suffering families. In honor of this sacred day, Frontpage has deemed it important to run Jamie Glazov’s article, Castro’s Torture of American POWs in Vietnam from Breitbart’s Dec. 8, 2016 issue. We hope that our leadership and citizens will take serious action on this issue. We will always remember and we will never forget.

*

Castro’s Torture of American POWs in Vietnam.
By Jamie Glazov

The death of communist tyrant Fidel Castro has yielded much-deserved coverage of the monstrous nature of his tyrannical rule.

What has gone virtually unreported, however, is the direct and instrumental role Castro played in the torture and murder of American POWs in Vietnam during the Vietnam War. The story of Castro’s atrocities against American soldiers in this conflict is rarely ever told, least of all by our mainstream media.

During the Vietnam War, Castro sent a gang of his henchmen to run the “Cuban Program” at the Cu Loc POW camp in Hanoi, which became known as “the Zoo.” As Stuart Rochester and Frederick Kiley have documented in their book Honor Bound in a chapter entitled “The Zoo, 1967–1969: The Cuban Program and Other Atrocities,” one of the primary objectives of this “program” was to determine how much physical and psychological agony a human being could withstand.

Castro selected American POWs as his guinea pigs. A Cuban nicknamed “Fidel,” the main torturer at the Zoo, initiated his own personal reign of terror. He was described in documents based on POW debriefings as “a professional who was trained in psychology and prison control in Russia or Europe.”

Creepy Enviro Brat Throws Tantrum at UN For Some Reason Daniel Greenfield

https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2019/09/creepy-enviro-brat-throws-tantrums-un-some-reason-daniel-greenfield/

Creepy environmentalist brat Greta Thunberg, who belongs in school instead of living out her stage parents’ aspirations of fame, threw a tantrum at the UN.

“You have stolen my dreams and my childhood with your empty words,” Thunberg began her rant at the U.N.’s Climate Action Summit.

Thunberg is a privileged 16-year-old from one of the more prosperous countries in Europe. Her family is quite well-off. She’s now a famous brat and everyone has to pay attention to her tantrums. How exactly did anyone steal this near-adult’s childhood?

Like an evil Pippi Longstocking, Thunberg has been prepped to act like the leader of a children’s crusade. But she’s less Joan of Arc than one of the Children of the Corn, throwing hysterical tantrums and demanding that everyone listen to her, while castigating them as liars and hypocrites once they do.

Some might be tempted to say that this is not atypical behavior from a 16-year-old.

There’s some truth to that.

Kasich Scolds Republicans for Lack of Response to Trump-Ukraine Call: ‘What Are They, Hiding?’ By Zachary Evans

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/kasich-scolds-republicans-for-lack-of-response-to-trump-ukraine-call-what-are-they-hiding/

Former Ohio governor and presidential candidate John Kasich wondered aloud in an interview Monday why Republicans weren’t doing more to pressure President Trump to reveal details regarding a whistleblower complaint against him.

“This needs to be investigated: if in fact the President of the United States pressured the leader of another country to investigate his [Trump’s] political enemy,” Kasich said in the interview with CNN.

Our Privileged Scolds By Victor Davis Hanson

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/09/privileged-scolds-should-lead-by-example-before-lecturing-others/

Let them lead by example before they lecture the country on carbon emissions, gun ownership, and ‘white privilege.’

One theme of the Democratic debates is collective furor — at whom or what is not always clear, other than at Americans who voted for Trump. Or perhaps at America itself for failing the expectations of our moral betters? Yet such rage is so deeply embedded in hypocrisy that it is not merely hard to take; it’s even harder to believe it’s serious.

So upset are our woke progressive candidates that they insist that the rich, the privileged, the white, and the native-born must now pay ever more penance. Amid such acrimony is an inconvenient truth, though one that remains utterly unspoken: Most of those on stage who are so livid at the exploitive “system” have become wealthy and quite privileged through it — especially since they have spent so much of their adult lives gaming supposedly poorly compensated political service.

Multimillionaire, mansion-living, ethnic-identity-stealing, and formerly house-flipping Senator Elizabeth Warren talks nonstop about corporate greed, endemic racism, and the need for executive fiats to deal with right-wing American pathologies. In Warren’s reductionist world, every sin originates with some Snidely Whiplash corporate CEO with a black top hat and handlebar moustache who trumped the success of her own past cynical efforts several hundred times over.

Beto O’Rourke, born into privilege and wealth, and married into greater influence and riches, was so pampered and well connected as a teen that his prior burglary and drunk-driving arrests were either dismissed or white-privileged away. Otherwise, had he been treated as others — including poor working-class whites from southern Ohio or central California — he might now be an ex-felon, and certainly might not be eligible to buy or own a firearm under the regimens that he now blasts as too weak.

Naturally, the multimillionaire Beto lectures the country on its racism, its original and permanent sins of white supremacy, and the need to confiscate some models of guns and to restrict the ownership of most all others. As in the case of erstwhile Native American Elizabeth Warren, Beto is so concerned about the asymmetry between the haves and the have-nots that he pushed a fake ethnic identity to do something about it.