Category Archives: 2016 Elections

Violence Breaks Out at pro-Trump Rally in Huntington Beach | Mar 25, 2017

Violence pro and anti Trump protestors. MAGAMARCH in Huntington Beach

| Youtube

Rally Aftermath

More @ Youtube

 

Pro-Trump rally draws 2,000 marchers, some protesters and a fight

| OC Register

“HUNTINGTON BEACH – A “Make America Great Again” march in support of President Trump drew about 2,000 people to Bolsa Chica State Beach, including protesters.

At one point, a fight broke out and a protester pepper sprayed several marchers, including the organizer. Three people were arrested.

Earlier in the day, march organizers said they were hoping for peace.

“I’m not just here in support of Trump, but our vets, military, police officers and emergency responders,” said Darlene Savord of Tustin, one of the organizers.

The march, one of several around the nation, drew about 2,000 people, according to Bolsa Chica State Park officials. The event, a sea of American flags and the red MAGA hats popular in Trump’s campaign, was billed as kid-friendly and family-oriented.

But it was held at a time when strong disagreements have led to confrontations between Trump supporters and detractors.

Eric Sewell, who supports Trump, said he was more interested in having a dialogue than a heated dispute.

“I wanted to come here to talk, not to have fights on the street,” Sewell said. “Not everyone on the right is a hater.”

Some of the protesters wore black masks to avoid being identified on social media. But Christian Cole of Irvine removed his mask to talk to Sewell.

“I came here to hold a sign, play some music and win some hearts,” Cole said. “Fighting was not on my mind.”

The march began at Warner Avenue and PCH, and extended along a two-mile stretch of the bike path.

At one point, about 10 protesters stood across the bike path, creating a human wall to stop the march. The marchers either pushed through or walked around them.

The clash was immediately documented on social media.

Photo credit: Gatewaypundit.com

John Beaman, a 54-year-old Trump supporter from Tustin, said he and other marchers were trying to peacefully proceed when things got ugly.

A masked protester pepper sprayed march organizer Jennifer Sterling. Soon after that, Beaman said, a crowd bearing American flags chased the protester into a parking lot. The protester jumped over a fence and was arrested.

“This is frustrating because we are trying to claim the higher ground here,” Beaman said.

Jordan Hoiberg from Newport Beach said the protester wielded the pepper spray in self defense.

“We were expecting it to be more peaceful,” said Hoiberg, a member of the Socialist Party USA, one of the protest organizers. “We were not about to start something when we are 10 people and they are a thousand. That would be suicidal.”

Capt. Kevin Pearsall of the California State Parks Police said three people were arrested on suspicion of illegal use of pepper spray. Two people suffered minor injuries, he said.”

….Continue reading @ OC Register

 

Harsh portrayal of hometown Congressman Devin Nunes riles neighbors and friends in Tulare California

| The Fresno Bee

“Nunes & Sons dairy north of Tulare, where embattled local congressman Devin Nunes learned the dairy business as a youth, is feeding and milking Jersey cows 24 hours a day.

Jersey cows produce more milk fat than other dairy breeds, making the milk worth more. But a detail like that is easy to lose sight of, and the image of cows with huge udders ready for milking makes it easy for the national media to portray the leader of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence as, well, maybe not up to the task when the controversy involved alleged Russian attempts to disrupt an American presidential contest.

That’s a view that plain annoys farmer Brian Watte of Tulare. He grows cotton, alfalfa, black-eyed peas and pistachio trees, and has known Nunes well before he was elected to Congress more than 14 years ago.

“This B.S. that he milks cows from Podunk and shouldn’t be on the intelligence committee – c’mon,” Watte said. “It’s just a continuation of, I guess, Trump’s election. They need to get over it.”

In the agricultural community of Tulare, the Nunes family is known for working hard and speaking plainly, Watte said: “There’s no beating around the bush. They are straight ahead. What you see is what you get.”

Nunes, whose district has been safely Republican with a 43-33 percent voter registration advantage for the GOP over Democrats, lives in Tulare and often comes home to see his family.

The Nuneses live in a gated community named Presidential Estates, where a three-bedroom, three-bath home lists for $340,000.

Judy Medcalf, a retired piano teacher, is a neighbor who rejects the national media’s negative portrayal of the congressman.

“I think it’s ridiculous,” she said Friday as she and her husband, Robert, a retired pastor, exited through the entry gate to Presidential Estates. “Washington is a broken thing, and I think it’s more of the same. I think we need to get past all this stuff and work for the common good of America.”

Like other neighbors of Nunes, she complained about the protesters who two weeks ago occupied sidewalks outside the gated neighborhood and made a lot of noise using a bullhorn.

“I support the First Amendment,” she said. But “to come where a person lives. I don’t see the point of that.” Holding public office is a sacrifice, and Nunes’ children have the right to feel safe at their home, she said.

“Devin is a fine person. He’s a good father,” she said. “I see him out with his children.”

Carlos Holguin, 73, a semi-retired contractor who has done cement work for Nunes’ dairies and ran into Nunes on a trip to Washington, D.C., lives next to the gated community.

“I’m kind of a Nunes fan or whatever you want to call it,” he said. “He’s a person who stands behind what he says … Quite a few people around here like him.”

The negative criticism of Nunes is off-base, he said.

“People are talking without knowing anything,” he said. “Democrats are sticking with Democrats. They won’t open their ears.”

Nunes represents the 22nd Congressional District, which includes Tulare, Visalia, Clovis and part of Fresno. He always has had strong support from the region’s farmers and agricultural industry. Last year, he won re-election by capturing 68 percent of the vote.

But the headlines of this week have also riled local opponents.

A group called Together We Will Fresno said it is helping to identify and support a Democratic challenger to Nunes and is raising money to try to turn the red district blue.

“Nunes’ sophomoric and apparently partisan stunt today is further indication that he is out of his depth on the Intelligence Committee,” Michael D. Evans, chairman of the Fresno County Democratic Party, said earlier this week. “Nunes has now used a national platform to embarrass not only himself but also his Central Valley district.”

But even those in Tulare who didn’t vote for Nunes shy away from that kind of rhetoric.

Ramon Cervantes, 71, who lives in the neighborhood next to Nunes’ home, said he’s not a Republican, but “I would not insult him. I’ve been in the military. Even if I don’t like my first sergeant, I respect the rank.

“My advice to him is to look at the bigger picture,” he said. “He gets information, then he goes to Trump when he’s supposed to share it with the Democrats. All eyes are on this and you do something like that?”

Jim Dokken, 70, of Tulare, a retired farm equipment sales general manager, said Nunes made a mistake.

“I like the guy,” Dokken said. “In this instance, I think he made an error in judgment.”

Nunes apologized to fellow committee members for not telling them first about how communications of members of the Trump presidential transition team, and maybe Trump himself, may have been monitored by intelligence agencies.

Nunes may be the hometown congressman, but life goes on and not everyone is watching the nation’s capital and the congressman’s struggles.

Kelsey De La Garza, 28, is a graduate of Tulare Western High and employed as a waiter who voted for Hillary Clinton and didn’t cast a vote for Congress. He was taking a power walk Friday in Blain Park across the street from Nunes’ neighborhood.

“I’ve seen his name posted everywhere on Facebook,” he said. “Something about surveillance.”

Meanwhile, Donahue Green, who lives across the street from Presidential Estates, was washing his golf cart.

“I’m not into politics. I’m a retired pastor,” he said. “I just pray for him. That’s all I can do.”

….Continue reading more @ Fresno Bee

 

“They’re Like The Praetorian Guard” – Whistleblower Confirms NSA Targeted Congress, The Supreme Court, & Trump

| ZeroHedge

Authored by Chris Menahan via InformationLiberation.com,

NSA whistleblower William Binney told Tucker Carlson on Friday that the NSA is spying on “all the members of the Supreme Court, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Congress, both House and Senate, as well as the White House.”

Binney, who served the NSA for 30 years before blowing the whistle on domestic spying in 2001, told Tucker he firmly believes that Trump was spied on.

“They’re taking in fundamentally the entire fiber network inside the United States and collecting all that data and storing it, in a program they call Stellar Wind,” Binney said.

 “That’s the domestic collection of data on US citizens, US citizens to other US citizens,” he said. “Everything we’re doing, phone calls, emails and then financial transactions, credit cards, things like that, all of it.”

“Inside NSA there are a set of people who are — and we got this from another NSA whistleblower who witnessed some of this — they’re inside there, they are targeting and looking at all the members of the Supreme Court, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Congress, both House and Senate, as well as the White House,” Binney said.

 “And all this data is inside the NSA in a small group where they’re looking at it. The idea is to see what people in power over you are going to — what they think, what they think you should be doing or planning to do to you, your budget, or whatever so you can try to counteract before it actually happens,” he said.

“I mean, that’s just East German,” Tucker responded.”

Continue reading more @ ZeroHedge

 

Best comment tonight at ZeroHedge:

Let’s file this under NO SHIT.  

Anyone who thinks that a society can function as a republic with political independence as a private bank creates  and disperses its money and shadow security agencies collect all forms of internet, financial, phone, text and other electronic communication are FUCKING INSANE.

 

Dems on Flawed End of Obama Wire tapping Scandal | Mar 24, 2017

Dems Claim Trump Team Not Wiretapped While Wiretapped

| PJ Media

“On January 20, the New York Times published a story on wiretapping of Trump insiders. In the print version, the headline was “Wiretapped Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides,” although you’re going to have to squint to read the acknowledgment of the print headline at the bottom of the page.

Still, if you look through the actual article, you’ll find this paragraph:

The F.B.I. is leading the investigations, aided by the National Security Agency, the C.I.A. and the Treasury Department’s financial crimes unit. The investigators have accelerated their efforts in recent weeks but have found no conclusive evidence of wrongdoing, the officials said. One official said intelligence reports based on some of the wiretapped communications had been provided to the White House.

On March 4, Trump tweeted:

Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my “wires tapped” in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism.

This, of course, has been the subject of lots of Claude Rains since then, as reporters and politicians announce they’re shocked, shocked at that accusation.

I’ve written about this before here and here, and I won’t go through the whole argument again as I’m not paid by the word, but the really inescapable conclusion was that either the New York Times reporting was false, or Trump was justified. The real question was identifying who in the Obama administration (or in the upper-level civil service staff) had been responsible for leaking information that identified a “US Person” — and would they be prosecuted for what appear to be felonious violations of 18USC793 and 50USC1801.

This strikes me as silly and disingenuous: it’s the same old “well, it wasn’t really a wiretap and it wasn’t really a wiretap of Trump” defense.

Now, after a lot of talk during hearings on Monday that no one saw evidence that Trump had been wiretapped, today Devin Nunes announced (quoting from his press release):

As a commenter at Instapundit pointed out, this is starting to look like the old Washington tradition, the “modified limited hangout.”

The Creepy, Long-Standing Practice of Undersea Cable Tapping @ theAtlantic.com

 

So, this is getting even more interesting now. It appears now that a number of Trump insiders were intercepted, and no, I’m not buying the argument that Trump saying “wiretapped” was wrong, especially since that’s exactly what was reported.

And it appears now that people trying to maintain that Trump was “lying” about being wiretapped are being driven to the interesting defense that it was a lie because the U.S. wasn’t actually wiretapping Trump people when the U.S. was wiretapping Trump people.

Which is, at least, good for a laugh.

In the meantime, though, I think Colonel Mustard should lawyer up: the bobbies are closing in.”

…Continue reading @ PJ Media

  – Some of the most interesting reads on the internet are the comment sections of the sites, sometimes they are the most interesting part of the site.

We’ll make a concerted effort to include more content from comments sections to contibute to the dialogue. /CJ

| From the comments @ PJ Media

News on this topic is being updated as I write but here’s how I see it.

There were illegally obtained intercepts of Trump communications (call them wiretaps, or intercepts, or whatever). They show Trump did nothing wrong but they can be used to continue to push the narrative ‘Trump was involved with the Russians to hack the election’ and keep the Trump administration mired in a haze of innuendos and suspicion thereby damaging his administration.

But they have a problem.

They can’t reveal their information because people will ask the obvious questions, ‘Who gave you this information? Who obtained it? How was it obtained?’

The Democrats and enemies of Trump are in a bind.

If they release what they have they will have to explain who gave them the intel and give a detailed account of how it was obtained.

That’s why you have Come[d]y saying, ‘we have information but I can’t tell you what it is’.

If they release the intel their game is up because they will have to reveal the sources and methods.

But having already admitted they have the intel but they aren’t going to release it because the investigation is ongoing only makes things worse for
them.

Democrats are screaming to release the evidence and wondering why Comey isn’t releasing the intel that will take Trump down.

Which leads to this:

If they release what they have the ‘Deep State’ (Obama White House staff) players will be exposed.

It’s like witnessing a crime while you’re committing a crime.

…More @ PJ Media

Obama Trump Spying Scandal | Why Obama Must Testify | Mar 22, 2017

Mr. Comey Goes to Congress to Get Grilled by Gowdy | Mar 21, 2017

Bezos’ CIA Washington Post Connection Exposed by Trump Leak | Mar 02, 2017

 

 

Obama’s Enabling of Illegal Alien Rapists with Open Borders Policies | Mar 22, 2017

Exclusive—Immigration Expert: Obama’s ‘Catch And Release’ Policy Allowed Illegal Alien Rape Suspects into the U.S.

| Breitbart

“An alleged rapist was delivered from Central America to a school hallway in Maryland by former President Barack Obama’s policy of treating economic migrants as if they were victims of crime, said an expert on illegal immigration.

“The only reason the older youth, Sanchez Milian, was in the country at all was because of the Obama administration’s catch and release policies that allowed him to be resettled in Maryland (with the support of taxpayers), with few questions asked,” the Center for Immigration Studies’ Director of Policy Jessica Vaughan told Breitbart News.

“Few groups of illegal immigrants have left such a violent mark in our community as these so-called unaccompanied minors—they are almost like modern day Marielitos (the Cuban inmates released by Fidel Castro decades ago),” she said. “Dozens have been arrested for violent crimes in Maryland, New York, Massachusetts, Virginia and Texas.”

Police arrested two illegal alien suspects, 18-year-old Henry E. Sanchez Milian and 17-year-old Jose Montano, on Thursday after staff at Rockville High School in Maryland reported a sex attack on a 14-year-old freshman who had just escaped her alleged assailants. Sanchez Milian is a citizen of Guatemala.

Border patrol agents encountered him in Texas in August as he crossed from Mexico into the U.S., according to WTOP.com.

Obama administration policy required he be issued a notice to appear before an immigration judge for a hearing, and in the meantime, Sanchez Milian was free to roam around as he pleased. Despite his age, he was permitted to enroll in a public high school as a freshman.”

….Continue reading @ Breitbart

 

 

Two of President Obama’s Undocumented Alien “Children” Brutally Rape 14-Year-Old Maryland Student During School…

| TheConservativeTreeHouse

“Those of you who have followed the Undocumented Alien Children (UAC) story, which began in the summer of 2014, will note the nationality of two UAC’s who brutally raped a 14-Year-Old Rockville Maryland Student.

Henry Sanchez, 18, originally from Guatemala and Jose Montano, 17, a native of El Salvador, brutally raped a 14-year-old high school student on Thursday.   Sanchez had a pending illegal alien removal case (deportation order) pending, which was not carried out while immigration activists tried to block the deportation.

Sanchez and Montano dragged the 14-year-old victim into a school bathroom where they repeatedly gang raped her during school session.  The sickening story is partially explained in the local news coverage:

The 2014 UAC Crisis was specifically an out of control influx of “Unaccompanied Alien Children” that were not children, and were not unaccompanied.

There were entire families relocating illegally, and thousands of South American gang members including MS13 gang members, all teenage or early twenties males, who crossed the border under the auspices of being children.  They were categorized as “refugees” and settled in numerous communities throughout the U.S.”

Much more here @ TheConservativeTreeHouse

 

Rep. Waters calls for commission, says ‘Trump is a liar and FBI Director still has no credibility’

| DailyKos

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) is not the least bit satisfied with Director Comey’s appearance before the House Intelligence Committee.

My takeaways: Donald Trump is a liar & the FBI Director still has no credibility. He needs to also explain HIS interference in the election.

Waters released a scorching statement demanding answers from Director Comey about why he chose to release a letter about Hillary Clinton’s email, that contained ZERO new information about her email and did not utter one word about the FBI’s investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian operatives. It’s a fair question and the American people deserve answers.

In her statement below, she also blasted the conduct of House Intel Chairman Devin Nunes and Republicans in the hearing yesterday, saying they demonstrated they “cannot be trusted to investigate.”

…Continue reading more @ DailyKos

Comey on Thin Ice: Can the president fire James Comey? | Mar 21, 2017

Next Words Director Comey May Hear From President Trump? ‘You’re Fired!’

| LawNewz

“If there’s one thing we know about President Donald Trump, it’s that he’s not afraid to yell, “you’re fired!” anytime he hears something he dislikes. 45 must be practicing his termination declarations Monday, after a day of James Comey’s testimony before Congress. Comey, the Obama-appointed FBI director testified today before the House Intelligence Committee, and that testimony boiled down to this: Obama’s wiretapping is “fake news,” and the Trump-Russia connection isn’t (or at the very least they are investigating).

If you’re thinking that it’s a little weird for the FBI to be commenting on an open investigation, you’re right. The FBI is generally pretty tight-lipped about its work. But bizarre times call for bizarre measures, and Comey explained that in “unusual circumstances where it is in the public interest,” he would share what information he could about what’s been going on with our president.

Comey began his hours of testimony with this confirmation that Trump’s campaign is being investigated, and that investigation is a criminal one:

While Donald Trump is known for his pervasive inconsistency, he is consistent about one thing: getting rid of those who threaten his authority. He has been known to fire (or, if we’re talking Hillary Clinton, threaten to “lock up”) any worthy opponent. Just last week, news broke that Trump had fired U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Preet Bharara and dozens of other U.S. Attorneys. Although turnover of federally-appointed prosecutors is typical, Bharara’s firing was not. For starters, it opposed a public announcement last November that Bharara had been officially asked to stay on into the Trump administration. Stranger still was the timing. Right at the time he was fired, Bharara had reportedly been conducting an investigation into Tom Price, Trump’s new Health and Human Services Secretary, over some shady stock transactions.

By contrast, Comey’s calling Trump out for lying about President Obama, while simultaneously confirming that the FBI is amidst an investigation over collusion with Russia is a one-two punch that leaves the Price investigation in the dust. Trump, a compulsively reactive person when publicly embarrassed, is likely doing far more than licking his wounds right now. But could Trump really fire James Comey?

He sure can. Under federal law, the F.B.I. director is appointed to one 10-year term – a term length purposely created such that it overlaps presidential administrations. Presidents may fire the FBI director (and Congress can impeach one) – and according to a 2014 report by the Congressional Research Service, “there are no statutory conditions on the President’s authority to remove the FBI Director.” While some FBI directors have resigned prior to the end of their terms, only one – William S. Sessions (appointed by President Ronald Reagan in 1987) – was ever fired. Sessions was fired by President Bill Clinton in the wake of allegations of ethics violations, such as misuse of public funds for his private benefit.

It was impossible to listen to Comey’s testimony Monday without anticipating Trump’s cutting short his tenure as Director. And yet, such a reality was all but unthinkable just a few short months ago. James Comey’s unprecedented public statement made the week prior to the 2016 presidential election was largely considered the thing that sealed President Trump’s win. Just a few days before Election Day, Comey announced that the Hillary Clinton was being reopened. Although little came of the announcement relative to that investigation, the bell could not be un-rung, and Hillary Clinton was pronounced for evermore, “extremely careless” with the handling of classified information. Candidate Trump could not have asked for a better gift; many, though, like Senator Harry Reid, and ethics specialist Richard Painter, criticized Comey for having acted improperly and perhaps even illegally.”

….Continue reading more @ LawNewz

 

Recent History:

 

Defiant FBI Chief Is Fired by President Clinton: Law enforcement – Alleged ethical abuses by Sessions are cited as reason for dismissal. He refused to resign.

| LA Times – 1993

“WASHINGTON — FBI Director William S. Sessions, who stubbornly refused to resign despite Justice Department ethics findings that he abused his office, was fired Monday by President Clinton–the first time a director of the storied agency has been dismissed.

Clinton and Atty. Gen. Janet Reno, steeling the Administration against claims that the decision was politically motivated, used unmistakably blunt language to describe Sessions’ failings. Reno “has reported to me in no uncertain terms that he can no longer effectively lead the bureau and law enforcement community,” Clinton said, adding that he fully agreed with her recommendation to replace Sessions immediately.

Clinton is expected to announce today that he plans to nominate U.S. District Court Judge Louis J. Freeh of New York, a former FBI agent and federal prosecutor, to succeed Sessions. Clinton met with Freeh for 90 minutes Friday night.

“With a change in management in the FBI, we can now give the crime fighters the leadership they deserve,” Clinton said. Administration officials said Monday that they know of no other candidate under consideration for the post.

Clinton dismissed Sessions after the director rejected Administration entreaties to resign, contending that to voluntarily step down would violate the principle of an independent FBI. The FBI director is appointed to a 10-year term but serves at the pleasure of the President.

Sessions was appointed 5 1/2 years ago by former President Ronald Reagan.

“We cannot have a leadership vacuum at an agency as important to the United States as the FBI,” Clinton said at a White House press conference. “It is time that this difficult chapter in the agency’s history is brought to a close.”

With Senate confirmation of the next FBI director not likely before fall, Clinton said that Deputy Director Floyd I. Clarke would serve as acting director. Sessions’ wife, Alice, has repeatedly accused Clarke of leading an internal cabal to force her husband from office, and Sessions has publicly questioned Clarke’s loyalty.

At his press conference, Clinton rejected the suggestion that Sessions fell victim to an internal vendetta and responded “absolutely not” when asked if the removal of Sessions would create the impression that the FBI is being subjected to political pressures.

Clinton cited the six-month-old highly critical report on Sessions’ conduct by the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility, which investigated the director in the final year of the George Bush Administration.

Clinton noted that the attorney general had studied the findings and thoroughly reviewed Sessions’ leadership.

Reno said that, when she took office last March, then acting Atty. Gen. Stuart Gerson, a Republican holdover, advised her that Sessions “had exhibited flawed judgment which had an adverse effect within the FBI.”

But Reno said she wanted to make her own independent assessment of Sessions’ ability to lead the FBI, noting that she felt very strongly that the FBI director “should be above politics and not automatically subject to replacement with a change of administrations.”

The Justice Department report found, among other things, that Sessions had engaged in a sham transaction to avoid paying taxes on his use of an FBI limousine to take him to and from work, that he had billed the government for a security fence around his home that provided no security and that he had arranged business trips to places where he could meet with relatives.

Sessions dismissed the findings as biased and said that they resulted from “animus” toward him by former Atty. Gen. William P. Barr, who–on his last day in office last January–presented the report to Sessions with orders to take remedial actions.

In addition to the sections of the report that have been released, the investigation looked into whether Sessions had accepted a “sweetheart” deal on his home loan from a Washington bank and into other matters that have not been made public, sources familiar with it said.”

…From the archives @the LA Times

 

Mr. Comey Goes to Congress to Get Grilled by Gowdy | Mar 21, 2017

Trey Gowdy Finds Out FBI Director James Comey Won’t Obey The Law & He’s Pissed

| Youtube

“It certainly wasn’t done to help an ongoing criminal investigation because you already had the information didn’t you? Is there something a newspaper reporter would have access to that the FBI would not?” –  Congressman Trey Gowdy

“I would hope not.”  – James Comey

“We the American people give certain powers to government in order to keep us safe, and when those powers are misused,  and the motive is not a criminal investigation or national security, then my fellow citizens are re-thinking their side of the equation, because that U.S. citizen could be them next time. It could be you, it could be me, it could be anyone.”

….More @ Youtube

 

Rep Trey Gowdy grills FBI’s Comey on wiretapping, Russia

| CNBC

The House Intelligence Committee heard Comey’s testimony in regard to allegations made by President Donald Trump that President Obama wiretapped him and the extent of Russian influence in the 2016 presidential election.

A transcript of the exchange follows.”

….More @ CNBC

 

Trey Gowdy Presses FBI Director On Intelligence Leaks

| WesternJounalism

“During Monday’s House Intelligence Committee hearing, Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., questioned FBI Director James Comey, demanding answers regarding various intelligence leaks that have affected the Trump administration.

Gowdy pressed Comey concerning the leak that led to national security adviser Michael Flynn’s resignation, asking the director if an investigation of those leaks was imminent.

The South Carolina representative pointed to the potential danger of these intelligence leaks, saying that citizens entrust the government with specified authority in exchange for safety.

“We the American people give certain powers to government to keep us safe,” Gowdy said. When those powers are misused...I’ll bet you my fellow citizens are rethinking their side of the equation.”

“That US citizen could be them next time. It could be you. It could be me. It could be anyone,” he added.

Gowdy also doggedly pushed Comey to disclose a shortlist of government officials who would have had access to the Flynn intelligence, naming a few officials to see if Comey would respond.

He asked whether former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former CIA Director John Brennan, Obama Attorney General Loretta Lynch and ex-White House adviser Ben Rhodes could have known Flynn was caught on tape conferring with the Russian ambassador.

Comey acknowledged all but Rhodes were privy to the information, the disclosing of which is a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison. He also said the FBI will take the disclosure “very seriously.”

Earlier in the hearing, Comey said the Justice Department had authorized him to confirm the ongoing investigation into possible “coordination” between President Donald Trump’s campaign and Russia.

Comey further stated that he had “no information” to support President Trump’s claims that former President Barack Obama ordered surveillance of Trump Tower during the election campaign.

“I have no information that supports those tweets,’’ he said. “We have looked carefully inside the FBI, and agents found nothing to support those claims.”

When asked by Gowdy to confirm if the FBI would investigate leaks regarding Flynn, Comey stated he could not for fear of validating leaked classified intelligence.

“I can’t,” he said. “But I hope people watching know how seriously we take leaks of classified information. But I don’t want to confirm it by saying we’re investigating it. I’m sorry I have to draw that line, I just think that’s the right way to be.”

The reply left Gowdy speechless and unsatisfied, prompting the congressman to ask Comey to seek authority “from whomever [he needs] to seek authority from” to seriously investigate and prosecute “what Congress thought was serious enough to attach a 10-year felony to.”

….Continue reading @ Westernjounalism

Federal Judge in Hawaii Backing Imam with Muslim Brotherhood Ties | Mar 17, 2017

Imam With Muslim Brotherhood Ties is Main Plaintiff in Hawaii Case Blocking Trump Travel Ban

| theGatewayPundit

It appears that the Muslim Brotherhood is essentially running our foreign policy

“The main plaintiff in the Hawaii case blocking President Trump’s revised temporary travel ban is an Imam with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Imam Ismail Elshikh, 39, leads the largest mosque in Hawaii and claims he is suffering “irreparable harm” from the president’s executive order, which places a 90-day ban on travel to the U.S. from six countries according to research by WND.

Via WND:

Imam Ismail Elshikh, 39, leads the largest mosque in Hawaii and claims he is suffering “irreparable harm” from the president’s executive order, which places a 90-day ban on travel to the U.S. from six countries.

One of those six countries is Syria. Elshikh’s mother in law is Syrian and would not be able to visit her family in Hawaii for 90 days if Trump’s ban were allowed to go into effect.

Hawaii’s Obama-appointed federal judge, Derrick Watson, made sure the ban did not go into effect, striking it down Wednesday while buying Hawaii’s claim that it amounts to a “Muslim ban.” The state’s attorney general, along with co-plaintiff Elshikh, claims the ban would irreparably harm the state’s tourism industry and its Muslim families.

 

….Continue reading more @ theGatewayPundit

 

Super. Our digital vetting system gave citizenship or green cards to thousands who were ordered deported

| HotAir

“That plan for “extreme vetting” may turn out to be extremely problematic, but don’t blame it on Donald Trump. The US Citizenship and Immigration Service began working on a program in 2006 designed to bring the vetting of immigrants into the digital era.

Unfortunately, as this new report from NextGov shows, it ran into problems almost immediately and even after implementation began it wound up being fraught with glitches and running “extremely” over budget.

Shutdowns, delays and budget overruns in the information technology system the government’s immigration service uses could allow terrorists or criminals to mistakenly receive citizenship or green cards, lawmakers fretted Thursday.

The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services’ tech troubles date back to 2006 when the agency began a massive program to create an Electronic Immigration System, or ELIS.

That project, spearheaded by IBM, had stumbled miserably by 2012 when USCIS cut the project up into shorter time frames with smaller deliverables. Since then, the project has continued to suffer bugs and delays, the agency and its auditors testified before a House Homeland Security Committee panel.

Forget about inefficiency and cost overruns. This next bit is the part that really caught everyone’s attention. We’ve been handing out green cards and citizenship papers to people who were supposed to have been loaded on a bus headed for the border. And we’re not just talking about a few here. (Emphasis added)

Because of system bugs, shifts between manual and digital processing and other issues, USCIS erroneously issued about 20,000 green cards and granted citizenship to more than 800 people who had previously been ordered deported during the past six months, an auditor found.

This project is years behind schedule, and while we’re used seeing Uncle Sam frittering away large amounts of the taxpayer’s money, being $1 billion in the hole is nothing to sneeze at. But that’s really not the alarming part here. It’s one thing to be concerned over whether or not tough immigration policies are depriving qualified applicants of good intent a chance to become citizens. It’s quite another to find out that the system is failing in the opposite direction and that nearly a thousand people who had previously been scheduled for deportation were mistakenly granted citizenship with another 20,000 getting green cards. And that was just in a six month period. How many have we done this for in total since 2012?”

…..Continue reading more @ HotAir

Hawaii Federal Obama Judge Appointee Prevents Trump Refugee EO | Mar 16, 2017

Hawaii Obama Judge Rules Muslim Imam Has Special Constitutional Rights to Bring Anyone from Terror Countries into America

|  Breitbart

“In a ruling issued on Wednesday afternoon, a federal judge, and Obama appointee, prevented the President of the United States from enforcing his own executive order to protect the nation from migrants from terror-riddled countries.

The judge then prevented every other judge and every other state from following the President’s order, the judge making himself a one-man Supreme Court and substitute President.

The judge then held that American universities and immigrants living here can prohibit America from ever limiting immigration from Muslim-heavy countries, claiming the First Amendment gives Muslim-dominant nations a right of immigration to America.

Such arrogance and abuse of authority sound familiar? Such First Amendment favoritism toward Islam sound familiar? Well, Obama did appoint this judge, and a rule of thumb with federal judges is they tend to mirror the psychologies of the man who appointed them.

The judge’s ruling is completely lawless, mirroring Obama’s deep state allies in his shadow government’s attempt to sabotage the Trump presidency. There is no precedent for the court’s order. In fact, every precedent is against the court’s order; just read the detailed logic and scholastic citation of proper governing legal authorities from the decision of a moderately liberal Boston judge who upheld every part of Trump’s prior order.

To give you an idea of how lawless the decision is, just try to find the analogous case the Hawaii judge cites for his ruling; there is none, not one single prior example of another judge ever doing what this Judge did to the extent he did it.

To give you another example of how baseless the court’s ruling is, even liberal law professors and scribes criticized the more limited Ninth Circuit decision that this Hawaii judge goes far beyond. Liberal law professor Turley noted Trump should win a challenge against that ruling. Liberal democrat professor Alan Dershowitz noted the same. Liberal law scribe Jeffrey Toobin conceded the same.

Attorney Robert Barnes joined SiriusXM host Alex Marlow on Thursday’s Breitbart News Daily to discuss his latest Breitbart News column:

“The district court judge in Hawaii, who was a fellow law graduate of Harvard law school with former President Obama – and, in fact, Obama was in Hawaii yesterday before the decision was issued, so some people have speculated on the coincidence of that. But he issued a decision that blocks the ability of anybody to enforce the order anywhere,” Barnes said. “So he went beyond just the district of Hawaii. He said no state can enforce it. Nobody in any part of the country can enforce it. Nobody anywhere in the administration can enforce it. He issued what’s called a nationwide injunction, and it precludes any application of the order, pretty much, on any aspect of the order, pretty much, until there’s further review.”

“His basis for doing so was an extraordinary interpretation of the right to travel and the freedom of association, which before, has only been associated with U.S. citizens,” Barnes continued. “Every court decision in the 200 years prior to this has said that people who are not citizens of the United States, who are not present within the United States, have no First Amendment constitutional rights. The Constitution doesn’t extend internationally to anybody, anywhere, anyplace, at any time. Instead, this judge said it did, as long as you had a university here who wanted to assert, quote-unquote, the foreigner’s rights, or you had some physical person here. In this case, it was one of the leading Muslim imams in Hawaii; he wants to bring over various family and friends from the Middle East.”

“The Hawaii judge’s decision says he has a First Amendment constitutional right to do so because he’s Muslim. It was one of the most extraordinary interpretations of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment ever given, which is that because these are Muslim countries that were banned where the issue of terror arises from that that meant they had a special right to access the country and visit the country,” he said.

“As long as there is somebody here that wants them here, no president can ever preclude them from coming here. He basically gave First Amendment rights to everybody around the world and gave special preferences to people who are Muslim under his interpretation of the First Amendment,” Barnes summarized.

“So it’s an extraordinarily broad order. Its legal doctrine has no limits. If you keep extending this, it means people from around the world have a special right to access the United States, visit the United States, emigrate to the United States, get visas to the United States. There wouldn’t be any limit, and the president would never be able to control our own borders. It would be up solely to the whim of a federal judge who effectively delegated it, in this case, to a Muslim imam in Hawaii,” he contended.

Barnes noted that the judge did not “cite any prior decision” that has ever established this astonishing new quirk of the Constitution.”

…Continue reading more @ Breitbart

 

Federal Judge In Hawaii Enjoins Second Executive Order

| JonathanTurley.org

Last night, U.S. District Judge Derrick K. Watson issued a temporary restraining order that prevents the second immigration order of President Donald Trump from going into effect on Thursday.

The 43-page opinion is scathing and relies not only on the statements of President Trump but the recent statements of his chief aide Stephen Miller.  While I respectfully disagree with Judge Watson and view his decision as contrary to the weight of existing case law, the opinion again shows the perils of presidents and their aides speaking publicly about litigation.

Watson found that there was a “strong likelihood of success” for challengers because “a reasonable, objective observer — enlightened by the specific historical context, contemporaneous public statements, and specific sequence of events leading to its issuance — would conclude that the Executive Order was issued with a purpose to disfavor a particular religion.”  He strongly dismissed the argument that this is not a religious ban since it did not impact the vast majority of Muslims: “The illogic of the Government’s contentions is palpable. The notion that one can demonstrate animus toward any group of people only by targeting all of them at once is fundamentally flawed.”

As previously discussed, I believe that the odds favor the Administration in prevailing in the long run.  It could face a mix of decisions on the lower courts as it did with the first order. However, this order is a better product and presumably the Justice Department will markedly improve its performance in the defense of the order.  I do not see how a strong likelihood of prevailing could be maintained on existing case law, particularly under the establishment clause.”
….Continue reading more @ JonathanTurley.org

Grandstanding Judicial Supremacy Must End

| PJ Media

“Here we go again. Last month it was Seattle District Judge James L. Robart who decided he had the authority to contravene the president’s executive order “on a nationwide basis,” temporarily banning entry into the United States of people from seven terrorist hot spots (Somalia, Yemen, Iraq, Iran, Libya, etc.). Come on in folks, don’t mind the laws of the United States! All are welcome.

Judge Robart, whom no one had ever heard of before, got a lot of play in the anti-Trump media (which is to say, the media tout court) and has doubtless been dining out on that sever since.

As I said at the time, Judge Robart’s restraining order, especially its nationwide application, struck me as legally dubious and, practically speaking, unworkable. Can we really have six or seven hundred district judges making policy for the entire country? For make no mistake, that’s what Judge Robart did. At the behest — or with the collusion — of a couple of blue state attorneys general, Judge Robart decided that he had the authority to contravene a legally framed executive order issued by the president of the United States and to make himself, Judge James L. Robart, the supreme law of the land.

Since he happened to reflect the establishment anti-Trump consensus, it was all a big hit with the establishment anti-Trump media. So it is no surprise that in the wake of the president’s new travel ban, another grandstanding judge — several of them, in fact — is eager to horn in on the publicity. Yesterday, U.S. District Judge Derrick Watson from Hawaii made a bid for his fifteen minutes of notoriety and blocked the travel ban just hours before it was set to take effect. According to Judge Watson, the travel ban was not about national security, as the president said, but “significant and unrebutted evidence of religious animus.”

I’d say that was ridiculous on the face of it. If Donald Trump wanted to institute a travel ban against Muslims, why would he neglect to include countries in which more than 85 percent of Muslims live? No, the ban has to do with national security, not religion. But leave that to one side. The real issue is: Who asked Judge Watson? As Andrew McCarthy has explained with his usual perspicacity when Judge Robart weighed in on the first travel ban, the president has plenary power to decide who may and who may not travel to the United States.

McCarthy cites federal immigration law Section 1182(f):

Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be  detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary,  suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or  impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate (emphasis added).

In other words, Donald Trump’s travel bans were perfectly legal.

But legality is not the issue. Political warfare is the name of the game. Judge Watson, joined by a handful of his anti-Trump confrères and the vast majority of the media elite, has decided that the judiciary, not the executive branch, is in charge of international relations and foreign affairs. (In fact, they believe that the judiciary, so long as it hews to a progressive agenda, is in charge of everything, but that is an issue for another day.)

Now the Ninth Circuit, which has jurisdiction over the case, is famously latitudinarian. It sided with Judge Robart in his original TRO last month. But things may be different this time around. Yesterday, five judges said they considered that decision incorrect. “Whatever we, as individuals, may feel about the president or the executive order,” Judge Jay Bybee of the Ninth Circuit wrote, “the president’s decision was well within the powers of the presidency.”

For his part, Donald Trump blasted the “unprecedented judicial overreach” of Judge Watson. What’s next? The president has vowed to fight the case all the way to the Supreme Court. Absent a ninth member of that Court, the decision is likely to be split 4-4, thus affirming the lower Court’s decision. So in part this story might be called “Waiting for Gorsuch.”

But I suspect the left-leaning judicial supremacists may have pulled off a scab from a wound that now will fester. There are various expedients that could be pursued. There is nothing in the Constitution that says the U.S. has to maintain a District Court system at all. A Supreme Court, yes. There it is in Article 3. But Judge Robart’s or Judge Watson’s perch? Tell me where the Constitution specifies that. Nor does the Constitution say anything about judicial compensation; perhaps it should be zero. Who knows what the ingenuity of man might discover?”

…..Continue reading @ PJ Media