A judge who helped open a Planned Parenthood abortion business in San Francisco has been censoring testimony this week in a $16 million lawsuit by Planned Parenthood.
Rep. Jim Jordan has been among the most outspoken critics of the farce that is the Democrats' "impeachment inquiry," and tonight, in a series of tweets, the Ohio congressman asks the uncomfortable questions that the media seems unwilling to. 1.
American Exceptionalism remains one of the innermost ideas shaping our national identity and still lies behind all of the war stories used to justify US foreign policy. Exceptionalism has been a part of American culture since the very first European settlers landed.
A false flag formula is becoming readily apparent in the face of so many mass shootings and bombings in the U.S. The phenomenon has become so commonplace in the last 3 years that it’s becoming more American than apple pie. According to ShootingTracker.
Whistleblower Complaint Null & Void, Dems’ Impeachment Push Has No Legitimacy – Former US Official
On 8 October, the White House made it clear that it would not participate in the so-called “impeachment inquiry” hastily kicked off by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on 24 September without a customary vote. Former Reagan administration official Dr. Paul Craig Roberts explained why the Dems’ impeachment push has had no legitimacy from day one.
Hours after the Trump administration blocked one of the witnesses in the “impeachment” probe from testifying to the House, White House counsel Pat Cipollone sent a letter to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and various committee chairs, dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s.
“I write on behalf of President Donald J. Trump in response to your numerous, legally unsupported demands made as part of what you have labelled, contrary to the Constitution of the United States and all past bipartisan precedent, as an ‘impeachment inquiry’,” the letter says. “As you know, you have designed and implemented your inquiry in a manner that violates fundamental fairness and constitutionally-mandated due process.”
Assessing the White House’s move in an interview with Fox News, Trump’s attorney Rudi Giuliani and American lawyer Joseph diGenova unanimously confirmed that if House Dems try to challenge the Trump administration’s move in court, they would lose. According to the lawyers, Pelosi’s decision to skip the floor impeachment vote made the process devoid of any legitimacy.
“If they [Democrats] go to Court they are going to lose, because the president and the secretary of state and others are invoking executive privilege, confidentiality privilege, absolute immunity privilege. And they are doing that because they have a right to when there is not a formal impeachment proceeding underway,” diGenova explained.
On the other hand, if Speaker Pelosi held an impeachment vote, that would have given the House minority the authority to subpoena and cross-examine the witnesses brought by the Dems, something that she probably did not want, as Jason E. Chaffetz, a former chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform (2015-2017) told Fox News on 1 October.
There’s No Evidence of Any Impeachable Offence by Trump
According to Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, an American economist and author of more than a dozen books who served as the United States Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy under President Ronald Reagan, “the Democrats’ impeachment push has no legitimacy because there is no evidence of any impeachable offence” by Donald Trump in the first place.
Pelosi’s impeachment inquiry based on hearsay, secrecy and no regard for due process is a partisan sham to overturn the 2016.
Dr. Roberts notes that one of the reasons why the House Democrats refuse to hold a vote to establish an impeachment proceeding is that once it is launched, it depends on actual evidence, of which the Democrats have none. The minute the Democrats vote to actually kick off the impeachment process, they have to abide by the legal rules or the process is null and void, the author highlights.
Currently, “the never-before-known ‘impeachment inquiry'” permits the Democrats “to continue to tell lies and make false allegations without allowing the President to confront his accusers on the basis of fact and evidence,” he elaborates.
The question then arises as to why the US mainstream media and prominent political figures have so easily bought into the impeachment narrative spearheaded by Chairman Adam Schiff and some other House Democrats led by Speaker Pelosi.
“The Republicans in the House have pointed out over and over that there is no evidence whatsoever of any offence by Trump, much less an impeachable one, but the media does not serve the Republicans”, Dr Roberts says. “It only reports the lies from the Democrats”.
As for the apparent neglect of the US Constitution by some Democratic lawmakers, the problem is that it “slowly eroded over time, beginning with the so-called ‘Civil War’ in 1860”, and was “completely abandoned by the George W. Bush and Obama regimes”, the former administration official emphasises, referring to the fact that “privacy, once a Constitutional right, no longer exists in the US” after the implementation of the 2001 Patriot Act.
On the other hand, the legislative branch, Congress, “is bought and paid for”, Dr. Roberts remarks, stressing that the body does not actually represent voters but “the interest groups that provide the campaign money to get representatives and senators elected”.
“The House Democrats intheir orchestration of ‘an impeachment’ crisis, and the whore media are hoping for two things,” the economist says. “One is that some of all the mud and false news that they are perpetuating against Trump will stick and cost him the reelection. The other is that it will wear down some of the weaker Republicans in the Senate who might be convinced by the donors to their campaign funds to vote for impeachment and thus leave themselves in office but out of power.
The former administration official expresses concerns over the Republicans’ hesitancy to complete the inquiry and indict the CIA and Obama Justice Department officials “who orchestrated the fake ‘Russiagate’ investigation“, while “the bought-and-paid-for servant of the ruling oligarchs, Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House of Representatives, speeds the ‘impeachment inquiry’ forward”.
“By the time the report comes out from the Justice Department’s investigation of who was responsible for the falsehoods of ‘Russiagate’, the US presstitute media will dismiss the report as an illegitimate effort of Trump to distract the public’s attention from his ‘impeachable offences’,” he warns.
Fake ‘Whistleblower Complaint’ is Null and Void to Begin With
The House Dems’ impeachment effort has triggered controversy from day one. The economist, who has kept the finger on the pulse of the development, raised a red flag on 30 September over the “whistleblower complaint” – the trigger for Pelosi’s inquiry.
Dr. Roberts pointed out in his blog that the so-called “whistleblower complaint” clearly violated the statute 50 US Code sec. 3033: a) the whistleblower’s activity had nothing to do with “intelligence activity”, as legally required by the statute; b) the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) does not have the authority to supervise the president’s phone calls, which means that the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community (ICIG), a subordinate official of the DNI, does not have this authority either; c) “the acceptance of this complaint by the IG was improper under the clear language of the statute”.
Thus, according to the economist, the document was “improperly filed, improperly accepted, and the filer was not even a whistleblower as defined in the statute”.
“The fake ‘whistleblower complaint’ is null and void”, he says. “The House Democrats can do whatever they want. If the rules get in their way, and they care about rules, which they do not, they can change the rules.”
Yet another wake-up call came the same day, 30 September, when the ICIG statement concerning the supposed changes in “Disclosure of Urgent Concern” form was submitted. It said that IG Michael Atkinson had decided that “there were reasonable grounds to believe” that the complaint “appeared credible”, although the “whistleblower” was not a direct witness to most of events described.
By that time, however, both the whistleblower complaint and the transcript of a Trump-Zelensky phone talk had already been out, and the discrepancies between the complainant’s description of the conversation and the actual call were obvious.
While the Republicans are calling for Speaker Pelosi to hold the impeachment vote, the House Dems have announced that they have a whistleblower with first-hand knowledge of the matter who has claimed that he\she would testify remotely with face and voice obscured.
Trump already released the transcripts of the Ukraine call. What is even the point of the second whistleblower.
“What comes out of this remains to be seen. But it will not be political stability in the Empire,” Dr. Roberts concludes.
Millions of Americans are finding it virtually impossible to keep up with their car payments, despite supposed "economic growth" and low unemployment, according to Reuters.
The Golden Golem of Greatness shifted into mad bull overdrive for last night’s Minneapolis fan rally, cussing and bellowing at the picadors of the Left who have been sticking lances in his neck for three years. Decorum is not Mr. Trump’s strong suit, but then the bull is not sent into the ring to negotiate politely for his life. The narrative of the bullring is certain death. The bull must do what he can within his nature to dispute it.
It’s in Mr. Trump’s nature to act the part of a reality TV star, and, of course, it is the nature of reality TV shows to be unreal. That is perhaps the ruling paradox of life in the USA these days. Saturated in unreality, the spectators (also called “voters”) flounder through a relentless barrage of narratives aimed at confounding them, with the unreal expectation that they can make sense of unreal things. In a place like Minneapolis of an October evening, you can go see the Joker movie or take in the President’s rally — and come away with the same sense of hyper-unreality. We’re no longer the nation we pretend to be and we don’t know it. Jokers are wild and the joke’s on us.
So it goes in these dangerous autumn days of The Fourth Turning. Something’s got to give, and all indications are it will happen where few are looking at the moment: the sideshow of money and banking. When things start slip-sliding away over in that alternative universe, Mr. Trump will be propelled into the role he was cast for in 2016: bag-holder for economic collapse. The global slowdown of productive activity and commerce is undermining a vast network of dubious financial obligations ruled by an overgrowth of loans that will never be paid back. Unlike New York real estate moguls, the whole world can’t just go into bankruptcy court and apply for a fresh start. The “workout” is brutal and produces epoch-defining trauma.
The nation has been too preoccupied with political mud-wrestling to notice that the US debt has gone hockey-stick parabolic, racking up $814 billion just since August. Math majors may see that’s close to a trillion dollars, or 4 percent of the total $22,837 trillion, just in a few months. Zowie! (Hat tip Steve St. Angelo.) Parabolic trends don’t end well. In the meantime, the Federal Reserve, as usual, attempts to “fix” the problems caused by excessive bad faith borrowing with additional excessive bad faith lending in its overnight repo operations and revamped non-QE QE. That’s telling you something about where the dollar is headed: history’s graveyard of dead currencies. The upshot is looking like an inflationary depression for the ages.
That event would kill the shale oil industry, and with it the prospects for continuing the mode of living that Americans consider normal. The shale oil producers will not be able to borrow more money from a crippled banking system to produce a type of oil that that is basically unprofitable to lift out of the ground. That’s when America starts to go medieval lifestyle-wise. The curious feature of this big picture is how the anxieties generated by these looming economic and financial tensions express themselves in politics as a sort of early warning system. The craziness of the Trump era — which is distributed pretty equally between both factions — represents the failure of all involved to cope with the mandates of reality, which really exist despite the illusions of our realty television zeitgeist.
The current impeachment frenzy is heading into a collision with these forces, along with the so-far secretive activities of Attorney General Barr and his deputy Mr. Durham. When that happens, Mr. Trump will not be the only mad bull in the national ring, and the nation will be notably short of toreadors. The whole bullring is liable to get busted up with quite a few fans gored in the ensuing mayhem. As I’ve averred before, don’t be surprised if the 2020 election doesn’t even happen. The institutional damage may be too deep.
History doesn’t like vacuums anymore than nature does, and what we’re facing is a vacuum of authority that the USA has never experienced before. That’s the final consequence of a society in which anything goes and nothing matters. Better check what you believe and who you believe in the days ahead, and recalibrate accordingly. This ain’t no foolin’ around.
This blog is sponsored this week by McAlvany ICA. To learn more visit://icagoldcompany.com/
Previously Unpublished! From the Jeff Greenaway Series
Man, I want to get away from US (and UK) politics, it’s too depressing and I’ve already covered it so much. But I keep getting drawn back in by the nonsensical propaganda out there. I read a lot of stuff every single day, and every single piece is starting to look like any other.
Hillary Clinton at the American Federation of Teachers Union on July 13, 2018 (Video screenshot)
Washington watchdog Judicial Watch's investigation into the scandal of Hillary Clinton's mishandling of classified information while she was secretary of state for Barack Obama might be coming to a close.
A federal judge is set to rule on whether the twice-failed Democratic presidential hopeful will be deposed in Judicial Watch's lawsuit.
The watchdog already has questioned former Clinton aides, and Judge Royce C. Lamberth has told Judicial Watch to "shake this tree" and see what can be uncovered.
The court already recently granted Judicial Watch additional discovery options into "whether Secretary Clinton's use of a private email server was intended to stymie FOIA; whether the State Department's intent to settle this case in late 2014 and early 2015 amounted to bad faith; and whether the State Department has adequately searched for records responsive to Judicial Watch's request."
The court has ruled that Clinton's unsecure email system was "one of the gravest modern offenses to government transparency."
"I'll tell you everything they've discovered in this period raises serious questions about what the hell the State Department's doing here," said Lamberth at the last hearing.
Previously, Clinton's former deputy chief of staff, Huma Abedin, while testifying whether Clinton understood federal records requirements applied to her emails, said Judicial Watch "would have to ask Mrs. Clinton."
"Hillary Clinton is now joking about her emails even as she seeks to avoid being questioned on this serious scandal," said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. "The court has found that this email use and cover-up are no joking matter."
Clinton's use of the email system had been characterized as a closely held secret while she was using it. But Judicial Watch said just days ago it had evidence the State Department knew of it as early as 2010.
Daniel Baer, an Obama State Department deputy assistant secretary of state, wrote to Michael Posner, then-assistant secretary of state, in 2010 about Clinton’s private email address.
He warned, "Be careful, you just gave the secretary's personal email address to a bunch of folks."
Baer noted she "guards it pretty closely."
But Clinton's email address was in an email sent to State Department officials about WikiLeaks.
"It appears the State Department produced this email in 2016 in redacted form, blacking out Clinton’s personal email address and the discussion about Clinton’s wanting to keep her email address closely guarded," Judicial Watch said.
Judicial Watch has been hunting evidence of the email scandal for several years. What it already has found:
John Hackett, former director of information programs and services (IPS) testified under oath that he had raised concerns that Clinton’s staff may have “culled out 30,000” of the secretary’s “personal” emails without following strict National Archives standards. He also believed there was interference with the formal FOIA review process related to the classification of Clinton’s Benghazi-related emails.
Heather Samuelson, Clinton’s White House liaison at the State Department, and later Clinton’s personal lawyer, admitted under oath that she was granted immunity by the Department of Justice in June 2016.
Justin Cooper, former aide to President Bill Clinton and Clinton Foundation employee who registered the domain name of the unsecure clintonemail.com server that Clinton used while serving as secretary of state, testified he worked with Huma Abedin, Clinton’s deputy chief of staff, to create the non-government email system.
In interrogatory responses, E.W. Priestap, assistant director of the FBI Counterintelligence Division, stated that the agency found Clinton email records in the Obama White House, specifically, the Executive Office of the President.
Jacob Sullivan, Clinton’s senior advisor and deputy chief of staff when she was secretary of state, testified that both he and Clinton used her unsecure non-government email system to conduct official State Department business.
Eric Boswell, former assistant secretary of state for diplomatic security during Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state, testified that Clinton was warned twice against using unsecure BlackBerry’s and personal emails to transmit classified material.
Center for Medical Progress President David Daleiden (left) and his colleague, Sandra Merritt (right) (Photo: Twitter)
Lawyers for a defendant in a civil action in California over the 2015 undercover videos that exposed Planned Parenthood and the American abortion industry's profiting from baby body parts say lawyers for abortionists have flubbed.
The civil lawsuit by abortion interests targets David Daleiden, Sandra Merritt and the Center for Medical Progress.
They released a series of videos that show, among other things, one abortionist seeking higher pay for baby body parts because "I want a Lamborghini."
The civil case, in which abortionists are seeking monetary damages for the videos, are a prelude to the criminal case pursued by the state of California against the defendants.
They are accused of secretly recording private conversations in public locations such as conferences and restaurants, even though the law provides an exception for such locations.
ACLJ said lawyers for Planned Parenthood called co-defendant Susan Merritt of CMP to the stand.
"She is the pro-life grandmother who went undercover to expose Planned Parenthood. The judge in the case has said that the abortion- related nature of the videos should not be the focus of the trial. But the attorney for Planned Parenthood opened the door by asking Merritt why she recorded her conversations with the Planned Parenthood doctor. And the judge allowed it.
"Merritt’s answer was that her main reason for participating was to see if Planned Parenthood was engaged in criminal activity," ACLJ said. "She said that she went undercover to see if abortionists were really willing to alter the abortion procedure in order to profit from the sale of human body parts, such as performing partial-birth abortion. She also wanted to see if any other laws were being violated."
ACLJ Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow previously explained that abortionists "had fought tooth and nail to keep this information from coming to light, and now their own attorney opened the door. This is a very big deal in this case."
The trial is expected to continue into November.
At the heart of the dispute is whether the recordings were made in locations that were private. California law forbids recording private conversations but does not forbid them when they are in public places, such as restaurants, where many of the videos were made.
That issue is integral to the criminal charges the pro-abortion activists in the state attorney general's office filed against the same defendants.
Judge William Orrick's impartiality also has been questioned because he was on the board of a community group that worked with Planned Parenthood.
The video investigation resulted in the closing down of at least two companies that had been buying body parts from abortionists. The companies were forced to pay penalties of millions of dollars to the state of California. Congress also asked prosecutors to review whether there should be federal counts against the abortionists.
Here are two of the videos released by CMP:
One of the videos that has been suppressed by Orrick includes more information about the body-parts industry.
It was available only briefly online.
However, transcripts of comments by abortion executives have been preserved.
Lisa Harris, medical director for Planned Parenthood of Michigan: "Our stories don't really have a place in a lot of pro-choice discourse and rhetoric, right? The heads that get stuck that we can't get out. The hemorrhages that we manage."
Susan Robinson of Planned Parenthood of Mar Monte in San Jose, California: "The fetus is a tough little object and taking it apart, I mean taking it apart, on day one is very difficult.'
Talcott Camp, deputy director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Reproductive Health Freedom Project: "I'm like oh my god! I get it! When the skull is broken, that's really sharp. I get it, I understand why people are talking about getting that skull out, that calvarium."
Deborah Nucatola, senior director of medical services at Planned Parenthood Federation of America: "You know, sometimes she'll tell me she wants brain, and we'll, you know, leave the calvarium in 'til last, and then try to basically take it, or actually, you know, catch everything, and even keep it separate from the rest of the tissue so it doesn't get lost."
Uta Landy, founder of the Consortium of Abortion providers for Planned Parenthood: "An eyeball just fell down into my lap, and that is gross."
Her comment was followed by raucous laughter from the abortionists at the meeting of the National Abortion Federation.
In December 2015, the Senate Judiciary Committee and the House Select Investigative Panel on Infant Lives referred the Planned Parenthood Federation of American and six regional affiliates to the Department of Justice for criminal investigation.
Operation Rescue noted little attention was given to the issue under President Obama, but after Donald Trump moved into office, the investigations "appeared to show signs of life."
See a CMP video about Planned Parenthood skirting federal law:
The "Lamborghini" executive:
Paying attention to who's in the room when infants are born alive:
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Thursday rejected claims that President Donald Trump has attempted to blackmail him in diplomatic relations this year. Zelensky told reporters his now-controversial July 25 phone call with Trump was not related to the U.S.
ORIGINAL LINK Pence: 'Release My Transcripts With Ukraine'
Vice President Mike Pence says he's working with the White House counsel's office to release his own transcripts of two phone calls with Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky amid Democrat claims that the Trump administration pressured Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden.
Pence said his conversations with Zelensky would exonerate President Trump from Democrat claims of a quid pro quo.
Pence was asked about releasing his transcripts and told reporters, "I'd have no objection to that." He spoke after an event in Waukee, Iowa, where he addressed supporters about the president's trade policy.
Pence said he "never discussed the issue of the Bidens" with Zelenskiy. And he again defended the president, insisting that a "plain reading" of the rough transcript of Trump's call with the Ukranian leader shows "there was no quid pro quo." -Yahoo!
Watch:
"The fact that my predecessor had a son who was paid $50,000 a month to be on a Ukrainian board, at the time that vice president Biden was leading the Obama Administration’s efforts in Ukraine, I think is worth looking into." - VP @mike_pence
Meanwhile there were two major developments on Wednesday to keep in mind. First, Ukraine was investigating Burisma Holdings long before President Trump asked them to, and second, a sitting Ukrainian politician announced leaked documents revealing that Joe Biden was paid $900,000 by Burisma.
And President Trump is facing impeachment for simply asking Ukraine to look into it.
Ukrainian MP Andriy Derkach revealed on Wednesday that former Vice President Joe Biden received $900,000 from Burisma Group for lobbying activities, according to Interfax. Former U.S.
Forget about millennials working until they die. As we've repeatedly reported, there's a far more pressing retirement crisis gripping America. And it's the unprecedented number of contemporary workers of retirement age who are putting it off.
The White House has implicitly moved to force Speaker Pelosi's hand by confirming in a letter that President Donald Trump and his administration won’t participate in the House impeachment inquiry, calling it unconstitutional and invalid.
JHK’s Three-Act Play
Tyler Durden Thu, 10/10/2019 - 05:30
