Nothing special to see in this illustrated edition — except for myriad Leftist follies blowing up in their faces and exposing them to deserved ridicule.
Nothing special to see in this illustrated edition — except for myriad Leftist follies blowing up in their faces and exposing them to deserved ridicule.
Some say Trump should be grateful he was “exonerated” and let bygones by bygones. I say, “NEVER!” The wrongdoers MUST be punished and Trump MUST dance.
On a more serious note, I can see where “reconciliation” might be appropriate response when an entire sector of society has engaged in immoral behavior over the course of decades or its entire history. Punishing each individual is time-consuming and there’s a serious question as to whether there’s any judicial process that can properly identify all individuals who deserve punishment or that can prevent the process from being used to wage private vendettas. [Read more…]
The news that there is no collusion is just a few hours old, but the wags have already created their memes and posters. Here are some of the best. Enjoy!
Mueller shows that Russia Collusion belonged to Clinton/Democrat, not Trump. We must now reinstate the Rule of Law by prosecuting those behind this crime.
Mueller Day has arrived — and what we find is that everything provided to the FBI to start this investigation — all of the factual allegations — were b.s. What should happen next is a special prosecutor to look at the greatest — and most illegal — dirty trick in political history.
Highlights from the findings of the Mueller Report, as summarized today in a letter to Congress:
“The report does not recommend any further indictments, nor did the Special Counsel obtain any sealed indictments that have yet to be made public.” . . .
“The Special Counsel’s investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election. ” . . .
“The report’s second part addresses a number of actions by the President – most of which have been the subject of public reporting – that the Special Counsel investigated as potentially raising obstruction-of-justice concerns. . . . The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion – one way or the other – as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction.
. . . After reviewing the Special Counsel’s final report on these issues; consulting with Department officials, including the Office of Legal Counsel; and applying the principles of federal prosecution that guide our charging decisions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel’s investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.” . . .
What Should Happen Now? We must reinstate RULE OF LAW in this nation. [Read more…]
Even though Mueller has totally vindicated Trump, you can expect cries for impeachment to intensify. Learn here how stupid those impeachment demands will be.
One of the Progressives on my real-me Facebook feed contends that she never wanted Trump to be impeached because, as Nancy Pelosi said, “he’s just not worth it.” However, now that the Mueller Report has finally dropped, she’s suddenly changed her mind and says that impeachment is the only way to rein in Trump’s power. In other words, now that the Progressive’s primary nefarious scheme to reverse the 2016 election has failed, it’s time to move on to the next nefarious scheme.
To support her new tack, the Progressive cites to The Atlantic’s March 2019 issue entitled Impeach Donald Trump : Starting the process will rein in a president who is undermining American ideals—and bring the debate about his fitness for office into Congress, where it belongs. The article is certainly timely insofar as its publication conveniently coincides with the Mueller Report. The Progressive says the article is totally believable because the author, Yoni Appelbaum, is a “moderate,” albeit one with a “little bias.”
Having looked at Appelbaum’s article, I have to say I disagree with the article’s title, with every argument contained within it, and with my friend’s assessment that Appelbaum is a “moderate.” It therefore struck me as an article ripe for the fisking. Before I do so, though, I want to do three things. First, even before addressing Appelbaum’s argument, which on its face gives the lie to any claimed “moderation,” I’d like to address Appelbaum’s record, which also gives the lie to any claimed “moderation.”
Appelbaum is an editor at The Atlantic, so he doesn’t write a lot. When he does . . . well, here are most of Appelbaum’s videos or articles over the past couple of years:
I don’t know about you, but I’m not seeing political moderation in Appelbaum. Instead, I’m seeing monomaniacal hate against Trump from a hard-Left perspective.
Second, before diving into Appelbaum’s article, it’s worth remembering what the Constitution has to say about impeachment (Art. II, Section 4; emphasis mine):
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
After Friday’s news drop, I think we can confidently say that, with Mueller refusing any indictments, treason is off the table. (Also, considering Trump’s morning joie de vivre, I doubt that the report says, “Trump should be indicted, but the DOJ has to wait until he leaves the White House before beginning the process.”) The question, then, is whether Appelbaum can make an argument for “Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”
Third, as we dive into Appelbaum’s reasoning, I’d like to remind you that surrounding a bad argument with endless historical facts and analysis will not remedy the false data and poor analysis lying at the article’s heart. Appelbaum, a history major, likes to tout his erudition. That erudition, however, does not offset the flat-out lies he advances, nor does it offset his illogical and often hysterical take on Trump’s presidency.
Now, let the fisking begin:
Appelbaum’s first two paragraphs say that President Trump swore to uphold the Constitution and, instead, has blatantly violated it, running roughshod over the separation of powers, the rule of law, and civil liberties (implying that Trump is a racist, misogynistic Muslim hater). Well, at least we know what Appelbaum believes he will prove. Whether he meets his self-imposed burden of proof remains to be seen.
Things start falling apart immediately because, in his third paragraph, Appelbaum goes directly to a tried and true fallacy, namely the appeal to authority. In this case, his authority is two well-known #NeverTrumpers; namely, failed presidential candidates McCain and Romney: [Read more…]
When I was trying to figure out the common threat for this illustrated edition, I saw that it was that most of these posters involve Leftists being naughty.
My personal history, which sees major stories drop whenever I’m away from my computer, means I think my upcoming trip will trigger an October surprise.
Without fail — and this has held true for the fourteen years I’ve been writing Bookworm Room — whenever I can’t blog, something big happens. Whether I’m doing trial prep, caring for a sick child, experiencing a power outage, or am otherwise away from my computer, big news breaks. Always. It’s as predictable as the sun rising in the east.
I’ll be leaving in a couple of days for a week-long trip, during which time I’ll have minimal internet access. (Don’t worry, though, because Wolf Howling will keep this site lively.) Because I’ll be mostly incommunicado, if the past is a predictor of the future, an October surprise, whatever it may be, is coming down the pike.
I’ve been amusing myself trying to imagine what the surprises might happen. One of my theories is that James O’Keefe, of Project Veritas, will drop a really big video about the Deep State. The last few videos were amusing, but they were about fairly small fry Leftists abusing the taxpayer’s dime while working for the government. I think O’Keefe has something big he’s still holding on to.
I’ve also been hoping for the last year and a half that Sessions will start indicting people. I’ve been clinging for months to the theory that the feud between Sessions and Trump is theater, intended to create distance between the two when the indictments drop. Yeah, yeah, I know this is just a gossamer-fine fantasy, but I still like it, so I’m still hoping it’s an October surprise.
Lastly, I wonder if an Inspector General will have something interesting to say in the next ten days. The two Inspector Generals I know of have been very, very quiet. Too quiet, if you know what I mean….
And that’s kind of where my imagination runs out on the conservative side of the aisle. On the Leftist side of the aisle, I expect Mueller to announce all sorts of horrible things about people close to Trump, or at least closer to Trump than the other people Mueller’s caught in his web. Because I think the Russia collusion is a sham that was cooked up within the FBI, DOJ, CIA, and State Department (not to mention the White House), whatever Mueller’s cooked up won’t be fundamentally serious, but it will keep the media happy in the days before the election.
Your ideas, please?
The unproven calumnies aimed at Donald Trump’s head are a reminder that, when governments, corporations or mobs deal in false accusations, justice is dead.
Within the past few days, Bob Woodward dropped a book claiming to have first, or second, or third hand information from anonymous people who are, like, totally in the know, and thereby backing up Omarosa’s claim that Donald Trump is a crazy meanie. With perfect timing, an anonymous, but nevertheless really important person, wrote an op-ed for the New York Times in which s/he announced that Trump is a crazy meanie, so that the person has been forced to mount a seditious movement . . . er, sorry, a Deep State movement . . . er, sorry, a resistance . . . er, sorry, a “steady state” movement (yes, really — “steady state”) to undermine the will of those American people who just happened to elect Donald Trump.
From the moment Trump got the Republican nomination, and with increasing hysteria and ferocity after he won, he’s been called a traitor, a Hitler, an idiot, a drooling idiot, a madman, a sex-crazed madman, a Nazi, a fascist, a criminal — and those are the nice things that we’re hearing about him. Oh, and again, these accusations come with striking regularity from anonymous sources.
I don’t see any of those things when I look at Trump. Instead, I see someone like my dear departed client. My friend was brilliant, chaotic, irascible, and one of the hardest workers I’ve ever seen, a man to whom vacations were anathema.
My friend also hated yes-men. Instead, he forced people, often rudely or brutally, to challenge his ideas. Sometimes he went his own way, but just as often he listened to other people’s positions and acted upon them. He was a difficult man to work for, but a strong and loyal friend. More than that, he sharpened my brain and elicited from me the best thinking I could offer anyone as a legal adviser. I was my best, smartest self when I worked for him. You can imagine how I miss him.
Trump is even more brilliant than my friend, and more persuasive and manipulative. I actually think he has as good a chance as any man on earth to bring the Deep State down rather than to be done-in by that same Deep State. Moreover, even as the media, Hollywood, and the Democrat Party (all heads of the same Leftist hydra) hurl non-stop, bizarre, anonymous, unfounded accusations at Trump, the American people are may possibly notice something interesting about this brilliant, difficult man: No matter the chaos leading to them (a stimulating, abrasive process), his actions are rational and, even better, really effective.
Leftists naturally insist that it was just another Obama miracle that, the very moment Trump stepped into office, all of Obama’s policies, which hitherto had failed, suddenly blossomed into effectiveness. Sane people, though, know there is no such magical coincidence.
Instead, Kurt Schlicter’s normals (that would be you and me) think that Trump’s policies are responsible for the bursting economy (which especially benefits minorities); the low jobless rate (especially benefiting minorities); the “tariff war” that resulted in Europe, China, and Mexico making huge concessions; the military demise of ISIS; the economic collapse in Iran; the long-awaited dismissal of Palestinian grievances and the end of subsidies for terror; the reinstatement of civil rights for college men; and North Korea’s willingness to engage with South Korea and give up its nukes. [Read more…]
This is a hodge-podge about debased funerals, corrupt investigations, stupid Leftists, Hollywood hate, and other stuff to amuse and dismay the reader.
Regarding the obsequies for McCain, it’s clear that the Wellstone funeral was a warm-up. I’d like to think that ordinary Americans, rather than being moved politically by demagoguery over a dead body (demagoguery that same dead person, when alive, planned for), won’t be impressed but will be disgusted. And that’s all I have to say on the subject.
McCain’s seat is not a hereditary asset. Rumor has it that the Arizona governor is contemplating giving McCain’s seat to his daughter, the execrable Meghan, or to his meaningless (but nicely wealthy) cipher of a wife, Cindy.
This is an appalling idea. These Senate seats belong to the American people. They are not family sinecures or heirlooms. Whatever drives Governor Ducey’s decision-making about filling that seat, it better be for the good of Arizona and the Republicans who elected McCain, and not for the good of the McCain political dynasty.
Aretha Franklin’s funeral turns into a circus. Aretha Franklin was a woman of tremendous talent who, so far as I know, always comported herself with dignity during a long life in the public eye. I wonder what she would have made of her funeral.
In the seats of honor were an antisemitic, anti-White, anti-Christian, homophobic madman and all-around hater (Farrakhan), an illiterate race hustler and antisemite (Sharpton), a somewhat literate race hustler and antisemite (Jackson), and a credibly accused rapist and serial sexual assaulter (Bill Clinton) who compulsively ogled an under-dressed entertainer in an obvious and unseemly fashion.
Bill was not alone when it came to sexually compulsive behavior. Bishop Charles Ellis III one of the pastors at the funeral seemingly spent a minute groping singer Ariana Grande (the same woman Bill ogled).
The viewing of the body revealed a raddled old harridan who claimed she had what it took to govern our nation but who is, in fact, so physically compromised she can no longer climb stairs on her own.
Giving a eulogy was a Georgetown sociology professor, Michael Eric Dyson, whose oozing Trump Derangement Syndrome suddenly gushed out in a burst of ghetto language attacking the sitting president. His verbal diarrhea was based upon that fact that Trump stated (accurately) that Franklin, whom he paid for her singing services at his hotels, “worked” for him. In Donald’s world (the real world), where talent is rewarded with well-remunerated employment, that was high praise indeed. Dyson, however, saw things in a different way: [Read more…]
Justice is supposed to be blind. That is not the case in America today and President Trump is partly to blame.
[Update: This today from the Daily Caller:
President Donald Trump chose to have the indictments of 12 Russian hackers announced before his Helsinki summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin, according to a Tuesday Bloomberg report.
Trump wanted the indictments announced ahead of the Monday summit to give him leverage over Putin, a source familiar with the matter told Bloomberg on Tuesday. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein gave Trump the option of having the indictments released before or after Helsinki, according to the report.
Rosenstein cited national security concerns to allow him to share details of grand jury proceedings with Trump.
A portion of this post was based on incomplete information and thus has been edited to reflect the above, that the timing of the indictments was at the behest of Pres. Trump. The thrust of the original argument remains.]
With the Mueller investigation discredited, Frank Bruni suddenly realizes that Trump used America’s winner-take-all system to enact conservative policies.
Frank Bruni’s latest opinion piece at the New York Times — Robert Mueller, You’re Starting To Scare Me — is a fascinating window into the Progressives’ narcissistic mindset. Superficially, the column has a single point: the Mueller investigation is sucking so much oxygen out of the room that nobody is paying attention to what Trump is actually doing. In reality, though, it presents a world in which there can be only one point of view and one way to do things. All other viewpoints aren’t just different, they are unacceptable, even in a two-party democratic republic.
Before I get to the “Trumpian horrors” that Bruni lists, I want to take a minute to comment on his overarching thesis (that Mueller’s investigation sucked all the available oxygen out of D.C.’s news reporting). Much as it pains me to agree with Bruni, I have to. He’s perfectly correct that the Leftist media’s obsessive focus on the elusive Russian collusion theory has left them without time or energy to talk about the other things that Trump is doing.
However, while I’m always happy to blame Mueller for lots of things, the reality is that the silence on Trump’s other activities isn’t Mueller’s fault; it’s the media’s fault. Just see my reference, above, to the media’s “obsessive focus” on Mueller. Nobody is making them devote 90% of their time to that story; it’s their choice.
Bruni’s plaint probably explains why Trump didn’t exercise more executive authority over the past year to constrain the Mueller investigation. It wasn’t just the bad optics of doing so or the fact that Trump is a law-abiding executive and therefore was unwilling to interfere with a process he knew would reveal him to be innocent anyway. It probably suited Trump just fine to have the media off screaming about Mueller’s investigation, leaving him free to govern.
Mueller Bruni is right about his major thesis, though, doesn’t mean he’s right about the minor thesis, which is that Trump has been committing governing atrocities all over the place. Apropos governing atrocities, when I think of them, I think of acts that violate the Constitution or the law of the United States. Some examples would be (1) allowing administrative agencies to legislate, as was the case with Obama’s HHS and EPA mandates; (2) weaponizing the IRS to shut down conservative groups during an election year; (3) spying on reporters; (4) entering into multi-million and billion dollar deals with foreign governments (the Paris Accord and the Iran Deal) without getting Congressional approval; (5) going into war in Libya without Congressional approval; (6) illegal gun-running into Mexico; (8) unilaterally changing Congressionally-legislated immigration laws to align with the Democrat Party platform, etc.
In all the examples I mentioned above, the problem for me is not that I disagreed with Obama’s policies. That’s a given, because Obama comes from a political ideology I oppose and, with him in the White House, I knew that his executive acts would run counter to my desires. However, that’s the way things happen in a “winner takes all” two-party democratic republic. The real problem for me is that each of the above acts exceeded Obama’s executive power under the Constitution or out-and-out violated federal laws. It’s one thing for an executive to pursue legal and constitutional ends that jive with his political ideology, even if I disagree with that ideology; it’s another thing entirely for him to go rogue. [Read more…]
Having heard the news about the raid on Michael Cohen, Scott Adams says “Fire ’em all,” and explains why.
BREAKING: Trump’s personal attorney’s office raided. Now Trump can do some firing. https://t.co/ClXRfxhIkF
— Scott Adams (@ScottAdamsSays) April 9, 2018
[If the above video won’t play, you can find the content here.]
The FBI gave Hillary a free pass for national security violations; now it conducted an outrageous raid against Trump’s attorney right before the IG report.
This morning, the DOJ, based on allegations passed on by Bob Mueller, executed a warrant on Trump’s personal attorney, Michael Cohen, sweeping up a host of material covered by attorney client privilege. Indications are that the information related to Stormy Daniels, something completely unrelated to a single thing about Trump-Russian collusion.
[Update 1: By all accounts, Cohen was fully cooperating with the FBI and DOJ. So why and how this warrant? The procedure for issuing this particular warrant would have had to pass a high bar and involved multiple people at DOJ. My suspicion, reinforced by the following from Liz Shields at PJM, is that it is the mother of all fishing expeditions:
One thing is curious: Mr. Cohen was cooperating with the authorities, so why were the jackboots brought in? A special team of agents will need to go through the material in order to identify communications that are protected under attorney-client relationship. If the New York agents just happen to find something relevant to Mueller’s investigation they can turn it over to the special counsel, The New York Times reports.
So just who made the decision to seek a warrant in this matter? We’re still waiting to find out. It is just being reported that the AG for the Southern District of New York, a Trump appointee, was recused from this matter and he, just like Jeff Sessions did with Rosenstein, turned the matter over to someone else in his office — all with the approval of Rosenstein. Rosenstein also approved the warrant at issue here.]
[Update: Andy McCarthy, writing at NRO, puts the investigation of Cohen in perspective:
Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign was caught hiding the sources of 1,300 large campaign donations, aggregating to nearly $2 million. The campaign also accepted more than $1.3 million in unlawful donations from contributors who had already given the legal maximum.
Under federal law, such campaign-finance violations, if they aggregate to just $25,000 in a calendar year, may be treated as felonies punishable by up to five years’ imprisonment . . .
The Obama campaign did not have a defense; it argued in mitigation that the unlawful donations constituted a negligible fraction of the monumental amount it had raised from millions of “grass-roots” donors. Compelling? Maybe not, but enough to convince the Obama Justice Department not to prosecute the Obama campaign — shocking, I know. During the Christmas holiday season right after the 2012 campaign, with Obama safely reelected and nobody paying much attention, the matter was quietly settled with the payment of a $375,000 fine.
Is the $130,000 in hush money Donald Trump’s personal lawyer paid to porn star Stormy Daniels on the eve of the 2016 election a campaign-finance violation? Probably, although it’s a point of contention. Even if we stipulate that it is, though, we’re talking comparative chump change.
Yet, as that lawyer, Michael Cohen, has discovered, what was not a crime in the Obama days is the crime of the century now. . . .
This is a mockery of equal justice, which makes the execution of this warrant look like an utter abuse of our legal system, all in an effort to overturn the results of the 2016 election.]
This warrant is from the same bastards who have yet – two years after the fact – to execute a warrant to verify that the single most basic fact of the collusion story, that the DNC server was hacked by the Russians. This from the same bastards that allowed Hillary to maintain her private server for months after it became known that she had run all State Dept. business through that server, all but certainly exposing thousands of confidential, secret and top secret documents and items of information in violation of our state secrets laws. During that time, Hillary and her attorney wiped that server clean. And now these bastards, seemingly having found nothing on which to charge Trump relating to Russian collusion, and having given Hillary and her team a pass on crystal clear felonies, go after Trump and/or his personal attorney on a technical violation of election law? These worthless bastards are out of control.
It is hard to express just how outrageous this is [Update: though Alan Dershowitz does a good job of it]:
The attorney–client privilege is one of the oldest recognized privileges for confidential communications. The United States Supreme Court has stated that by assuring confidentiality, the privilege encourages clients to make “full and frank” disclosures to their attorneys, who are then better able to provide candid advice and effective representation.
Indeed, the Attorney Client privilege is not merely judge made law well over a century old, it is part of the Federal Rules of Evidence passed into law by Congress. If a prosecutor is even thinking of violating it, he has a high bar to overcome. That is doubly so in this case where the warrant was issued ex parte, without any chance for Trump or his attorney to object and be heard. [Read more…]
Recent commentary from Adam Schiff, Andrew McCarthy, Lee Smith and others illuminates important issues swirling around the Trump-Russia collusion narrative.
Rep. Adam Schiff, one of the four Congressional Democrats with the clearance to actually put eyes on all of the top secret documents made available to date by the FBI and others as part of the House Intelligence Committee investigation, made a jaw dropping admission in so many words while answering media questions. He admits he has seen no evidence to date to establish any sort of criminal conspiracy between Trump and Russia. In other words, more than a year into this politically-driven investigation, there is no Trump-Russia Collusion.
So, if there is no evidence to support any of the allegations, when are we going to start investigating to determine whether this was a criminal enterprise involving Christopher Steele, CIA Director John Brennan, Fusion GPS, the DNC and others to throw the election to Clinton, destroy Trump’s presidency, and protect corrupt government officials?
Lee Smith, writing at The Federalist, looks in detail at how senior figures in the media, namely New Yorker editor David Remnick, Atlantic editor Jeffrey Goldberg, former New Republic editor Franklin Foer, and Washington Post columnist Anne Applebaum, coordinated with Fusion GPS and the DNC to create an echo chamber, driving the Trump Russia collusion narrative. It is a sordid story that needs to come out as well.
On a related note is a Ted Talk given by Sheryl Attkinson, where she not only puts in perspective “fake news,” but identifies the source of the fake news controversy, much of which involves the Trump-Russia narrative, with a starring role from a Google owner. The progressive left has used the mantra of “fake news” to justify their creep into censoring conservative voices. I’ve long believed that social media sites and the major search engines are so powerful that they need either to be subject to anti-trust litigation and / or they need to be required to adhere to the First Amendment as if they were a public institution. [Read more…]
A year after the collusion story against Trump took hold, we know it’s fake and it’s boomeranging with potentially serious consequences against Democrats.
The year 2017 started with the Proggies pushing the “Trump colluded with Russia” narrative to overturn Trump’s election. 2017 ended with the collusion narrative in tatters and on its way back to bite the Proggies in the posterior, if indeed, as it seems, the entire investigation, including FISA warrants, was a joint operation of the DNC, Hildabeast, Fusion GPS, and the FBI to criminally misuse the legal system to undermine Trump, both during the campaign and then after the election. It makes bugging the DNC headquarters at the Watergate Hotel look quaint in comparison.
So, 2018 starts with the Proggies unable to push the collusion narrative, tied as it is to the Steele dossier, to undermine Trump. Instead, the Proggies are on the defensive, doing their best to claim that the Steele dossier was merely ancillary to the collusion investigation. It is quite the enjoyable “shirt collar” moment.
Going full circle to the moment Trump fired Comey, the new hotness is, once again, that Trump obstructed justice. The only thing that comes anywhere close to a colorable obstruction claim was Trump’s telling Comey that he hoped the FBI could see its way to treating Michael Flynn with leniency. As I pointed out here at the time, Trump’s words, as well as Comey’s contemporaneous interpretation – that he was not being ordered to end the investigation of Flynn – always meant that the event cannot serve as the basis for an obstruction of justice charge. Period.
Indeed, it seems that the Proggies’ primal scream of “obstruction,” always inchoate, now extends far beyond, Flynn. The latest narrative is that Trump, to win the 2016 election, tried to obstruct the entire investigation into collusion between his administration and Russia. Leaving aside, for the moment, that it seems ever more likely that the investigation is itself unlawful, the Proggies are suddenly claiming that they are in possession of new evidence that Trump obstructed everything. This charge comes from the latest op-ed in the Times, Did Trump Obstruct Justice? [Read more…]