Deep State Engineered Sessions’ Recusal! – Comey Withheld Info From Sessions Because He Knew About His Recusal Beforehand


Deep State Engineered Sessions’s Recusal! – Comey Withheld Info From Sessions Because He Knew About His Recusal Beforehand

Cristina Laila
by Cristina Laila
December 9, 2018

On Saturday, the House Committees released the 235-page transcript from Comey’s closed-door interview that was conducted on Friday.

Comey was defiant in his interview with GOP lawmakers and said he “didn’t remember” 71 times, “didn’t know” 166 times and said “I don’t recall” 8 times.

The fired FBI boss did admit to a few things, however.

James Comey testified that he withheld information from Attorney General Jeff Sessions about his meeting with Donald Trump.
Comey and the Obama Deep State engineered Sessions’s recusal!

President Trump had no idea AG Jeff Sessions was going to recuse himself from the Russia investigation and matters involving Hillary Clinton, but the FBI knew.

Jeff Sessions cited the wrong law when he recused himself from his job on March 2nd, 2017. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein subsequently took over the Justice Department – Rosenstein then appointed Robert Mueller as special counsel to harass and imprison President Trump and members of his 2016 campaign.

Via Tom Fitton:

The exchange took place during questioning from Reps. Jim Jordan and Mark Meadows.

Comey first revealed this with his exchange between Congressman Jim Jordan (R-OH):

Mr. Jordan. Why did you decide not to share it with the leadership of the Justice Department?

Mr. Comey. Because we believed that the Attorney General, Mr. Sessions, was —

Mr. Jordan. Excuse me one second. I’ve got to move. I’m having trouble seeing you here.

Mr. Comey. We believed that the Attorney General, Mr. Sessions, was on the cusp of recusing himself from anything related to Russia, so it didn’t make any sense to brief him on it, and that there was no Deputy Attorney General at that point.

Mr. Jordan. Why would you make that assumption? I mean, just because — I mean, first of all, if he was on the cusp of leaving, that’s a judgment call. Maybe he was; maybe — I can’t recall exactly what was going on in February. But he’s still the Attorney General. He had not recused himself. If this is something important enough for you to memorialize, talk to your top people, why not then share it with the top law enforcement official in the government?

Mr. Comey. Because we believed — it turns out correctly — that he was about to step out of any involvement, anything related to Russia.

Mr. Jordan. I understand that. But just because you believe he’s about to do something doesn’t change the fact that he’s the Attorney General and, frankly, as the Attorney General for our government, should receive that kind of information, I would think.

Congressman Mark Meadows (R-NC) then grilled Comey on how he knew Sessions was going to recuse himself and why he withheld information from the top law enforcement officer in the country:

Mr. Meadows. So how did you know that he was on the cusp, according to your words, the cusp of recusal? How would you know that?

Mr. Comey. A couple of reasons. It seemed like an obvious case for recusal, given his role in the campaign. And I think — in fact, I know we had been told by that point that the career officials at the Department of Justice were recommending that he recuse himself. I think we knew that at that point. So it seemed a foregone conclusion the Attorney General was going to step out of Russia matters.

Mr. Meadows. So who told you?

Mr. Comey. I don’t remember.

Mr. Meadows. Why would they have told you?

Mr. Comey. Well, the person who told me would have been someone on my senior team.

Mr. Meadows. Yeah, but why would that have been communicated? Before a recusal actually took place, why would they be communicating that to you, Director Comey?

Mr. Comey. Why would my staff be telling me?

Mr. Meadows. No. Why would someone at the Department of Justice tell you that Jeff Sessions is going to recuse himself that would actually change your actions and what you decided to do?

Mr. Comey. First of all, I know I said this before, but no one told me from the Department of Justice. If your question is, why would someone at the Department of Justice tell someone at the FBI, that I don’t know.

Mr. Meadows. So who told you? I mean, obviously, it changed your decision. So you’re saying that you have no knowledge of who told you that Jeff Sessions was on the cusp of recusal?

Mr. Comey. Yeah. It didn’t —

Mr. Meadows. That’s your testimony?

Mr. Comey. It didn’t change my decision. It was —

Mr. Meadows. Well, it obviously did because you didn’t take it to the Attorney General, which is the highest law enforcement officer. You didn’t take it to him. So your testimony just now suggested that it did change your actions.

Mr. Comey. No. I’m suggesting it was a factor in a decision I made. It was reality, and I stared at that reality and, based on that reality, I made a decision. The decision was, let’s hold onto it until they sort out their leadership.

Comments

As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to edit or remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. The same applies to trolling, the use of multiple aliases, or just generally being a jerk. Enforcement of this policy is at the sole discretion of the site administrators and repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without warning. Guest posting is disabled for security reasons.

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com

Congress in no rush to hold themselves accountable for sexual harassment payments

Do you recall, back during the initial rush of the #MeToo moment, when we discovered that legislators in the House and Senate had slush funds available to pay for the silence of sexual harassment accusers? There was a general uproar over that and we were assured that the members were going to get right to work on cleaning up their act. Good times, my friends. But what happened to that project?

As it turns out, not much. There were proposals written, and the House actually passed a bill, but when it hit the Senate, nobody could ever seem to agree on the details. And now, with the lame duck session drawing to a close, we don’t seem to be much closer to a final bill being passed. (Boston Globe)

Lawmakers are scrambling to finish a long-promised deal to tackle sexual harassment on Capitol Hill — over a year after a series of harassment scandals forced several members of Congress to resign.

“We are much closer than we’ve ever been, and we are aiming to be in the end-of-the-year [legislative] package,” said Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, a leader on the Senate’s version of the bill, last week. “People really want to get it done.”

Under the current rules, members of Congress have been able to use taxpayer dollars for settlements stemming from sexual harassment allegations.

Klobuchar makes it sound as if they’re close to the finish line, but are they really? The House passed legislation back in February (unanimously!) that would make members personally liable for such payments in cases of both sexual harassment and discrimination complaints, end the slush fund and introduce more transparency. But somehow the Senate couldn’t seem to agree to it.

The Senate version of the bill only holds members liable for harassment claims, not discrimination. And the transparency issue seems to be a bit more cloudy. Thus far, all Mitch McConnell has said is the same statement he released a few months ago, saying the Senate would “pass something” by the end of the year. Meanwhile, the two chambers are now looking at passing separate bills having different standards for the House and Senate.

How was this ever viewed as anything but a layup? If there are credible accusations against the members by their staffers that either discrimination or sexual harassment are going on, that is of automatic interest to the voting public. If hush money is being paid to the accusers on the taxpayers’ dime, the level of interest and need for transparency shoots through the roof. Who precisely is holding up that vote in the Senate?

Assuming they get something either shoehorned into the final appropriations bill or pushed forward on a standalone vote, they have to know that everyone is going to be watching and counting up the names on each side. In the current climate around the nation, voting against such accountability measures should be an automatic trigger for a primary challenge in the next available election. The fact that the House bill didn’t immediately pass in the Senate and land on the President’s desk is a low point in an already dubious public record on this issue.

The post Congress in no rush to hold themselves accountable for sexual harassment payments appeared first on Hot Air.

via Hot Air

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://hotair.com

Lindsey Graham to Trump: ‘Dig In, Do Not Give In’ on Border Wall


On this week’s broadcast of Fox News Channel’s “Sunday Morning Futures,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) advised President Donald Trump not to give in on his demand for $5 billion in border wall funding.

Graham said, “If I were the president, I would dig in and not give in on additional wall funding. I want the whole $5 billion because the caravan is a game-changer.”

He continued, “After the caravan, if you don’t see the need for additional border security, you’re just not paying much attention. So Mr. President, dig in, do not give in when it comes to the wall.”

He added, “If I were the president, I’d say, I want two years of wall funding, and I’ll give legal status to the DACA recipients. That’s a good deal for the country.”

Follow Pam Key on Twitter @pamkeyNEN

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.breitbart.com

Reminder: Rod Rosenstein Cleared Clintons in the Past – His Wife Lisa Barsoomian Represented Clintons in the Past


Reminder: Rod Rosenstein Cleared Clintons in the Past – His Wife Lisa Barsoomian Represented Clintons in the Past

Jim Hoft
by Jim Hoft
December 9, 2018

Here’s a reminder on how conflicted the “acting” Attorney General Rod Rosenstein is and should be removed from office.

Senator Lindsey Graham sent a letter in June to Assistant Attorney General Rod Rosenstein about whether Rosenstein should recuse himself from the Mueller investigation due to his obvious conflicts with the case.

Graham should also request information about Rosenstein’s wife who represented the Clintons in the past.

According to sources as reported at FOX News

Top Republican Senator Lindsey Graham is pressing Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein on whether the Justice Department official should recuse himself from the Robert Mueller investigation due to his own connections to the case. In a letter obtained by Fox News, Graham, R-S.C., asked Rosenstein whether he considers himself a “potential witness” in the Mueller probe in connection with the firing of FBI Director James Comey.

“If so, should you recuse yourself from further interactions with and oversight of the Mueller investigation?” Graham asked.

Graham, in the May 31-dated letter, cited reports that Mueller’s investigation is looking at whether President Trump obstructed justice by firing Comey – and the fact that Trump relied on a Rosenstein-authored memo to justify the firing.  Rosenstein’s role was further detailed in a New York Times report earlier this week on a memo written by ousted FBI official Andrew McCabe.

Fox News has confirmed that the memo described a meeting where Rosenstein claimed Trump had asked him to reference Russia in his recommendation to fire Comey. Rosenstein declined, and instead focused on Comey’s handling of the Hillary Clinton email probe. Trump pushed back on the account Thursday.  “Not that it matters but I never fired James Comey because of Russia! The Corrupt Mainstream media loves to keep pushing that narrative, but they know it is not true!” Trump tweeted.

Rosenstein has many conflicts of interest related to the Mueller investigation as well as Mueller and Mueller’s entire team as we pointed out in early May.  The Mueller investigation is arguably the most one-sided and conflicted group of lawyers and investigators in history.  They all are conflicted.

But Rosenstein may be more conflicted than the entire gang.  Rosenstein wrote the letter for President Trump recommending Comey’s firing.  This alone should disqualify him and the entire investigation from taking place.

Rosenstein and Mueller were both heavily involved in the Uranium One case where the Obama Administration and his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton allowed the sale of 20% of the US’s uranium to Russia.  This was the Russian scandal involving our government.  This is what the DOJ should be investigating and Rosenstein should recuse himself from that as well.

But one other conflict of interest that Rosenstein has is related to his wife.

Rosenstein’s wife, Lisa Barsoomian, represented Bill Clinton in a case in the 1990’s.  This alone should be enough for Rosenstein to be unqualified for any role related to the Clintons, Obama or their cronies.

Roger Stone reported the following on Lisa Barsoomian in 2017 –

Enter Lisa Barsoomian, wife of Rod Rosenstein.  Lisa is a high-powered attorney in Washington, DC, who specializes in opposing Freedom of Information Act requests on behalf of the Deep State, err, I mean, the Intelligence Communities.

Lisa Barsoomian works for R. Craig Lawrence, an attorney who has represented Robert Mueller three times, James Comey five times, Barack Obama forty-five times, Kathleen Sebellius fifty-six times, Bill Clinton forty times, and Hillary Clinton seventeen times between 1991 and 2017.

Barsoomian participated in some of this work personally and has herself represented the FBI at least five separate times.  It would be great to research the specifics of the cases she worked in, many of the documents from the Court Docket relating to these cases have been removed from the D.C. District and Appeals Court, including her representation for Clinton in 1998’s case Hamburg. V. Clinton.

Her loyalties are clearly with the entities that make up the Deep State, as are her husbands.

They are a DC Globalist Power Couple, and they mean to destroy Donald Trump under the bidding of their Globalist Masters.  Rod Rosenstein should not have any position in President Trump’s administration, let alone one with so much power to harm the Office of the Presidency.

The rules for recusal are clear.  There are legal statutes for this.  The fact that this case has so many material conflicts of interest automatically makes it a sham and farce.

The entire Mueller investigation should be thrown out just for Rosenstein’s conflicts, let alone the rest of the Mueller team of thugs.  Rosenstein’s wife is enough reason for him to recuse himself!

Comments

As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to edit or remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. The same applies to trolling, the use of multiple aliases, or just generally being a jerk. Enforcement of this policy is at the sole discretion of the site administrators and repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without warning. Guest posting is disabled for security reasons.

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com

Report: Jay-Z’s College Student Scholarship ‘Barely Enough to Cover Books’


According to a review of its expenditures, rapper Jay-Z’s college scholarship fund does not seem to be doing much good for the few students who receive its grants.

The singer’s Shawn Carter Scholarship Fund gave out what might seem like an impressive $407,250 in grants last year. However, it appears that individual students did not find the grants very helpful, according to the New York Post.

Individual students only got between $1,000 to $2,500 each, “barely enough to cover books,” the paper wrote.

The money reportedly went right to the colleges, not to the students, with $32,000 going to Virginia State University for an undisclosed number of students.

The fund, administered by the singer’s mother, Gloria Carter, took in $742,118 in 2018, most of which came from Jay-Z himself.

The charity claims it tries to help needy students, but it also charges the students $200 each to participate in the program and only 32 students signed up last year.

It also appears that large amounts of the fund’s money go to cover special events. For instance, the fund spent $44,581 to pay for a bus tour of traditionally black colleges last year. And its annual toy giveaway at Marcy Houses in Brooklyn cost $8,452.

The Shawn Carter fund was not the only spending the “Dirt Off Your Shoulder” singer put toward education. With 2018 earnings estimated at $76.5 million, Jay-Z and his pop star wife, Beyonce, dolled out ten scholarships of $100,000 each this year, the cash going for the 2019 school season.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston.

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.breitbart.com

Gun Control Fail: California Firearm Homicides Up 18 Percent


California, a state with every gun control imaginable, witnessed an 18 percent rise in firearm homicides from 2014 to 2016.

This rise in firearm homicides comes despite the fact that Democrats, gun control groups, and the establishment media constantly claim that states with the strictest gun controls see lower rates of violence and death.

California has universal background checks, gun registration requirements, red flag laws (i.e., Gun Violence Restraining Orders), a ten-day waiting period for gun purchases, an “assault weapons” ban, a one-gun-per-month limit on handgun purchases, a minimum firearm purchase age of 21, a ban on campus carry, a “good cause” restriction for concealed carry permit issuance, and controls on the purchase of ammunition. The ammunition controls limit law-abiding Californians to buying ammunition from state-approved vendors–all of whom are in-state sellers–and adds a fee to any ammunition bought online, also requiring that ammunition to be shipped to a state-approved vendor for pickup.

Additionally, the state mandates gun free zones in businesses where alcohol is sold for on-site consumption. Therefore, the few concealed carry permit holders in the state must enter myriad restaurants without any means of self-defense. This provides a target-rich environment for attackers who want to be sure no one can shoot back when they strike. We last saw this on November 7, 2018, when an attacker opened fire with a handgun in the gun-free Borderline Bar & Grill in Thousand Oaks, California.

Despite all the stringent gun controls a bill filed by Assemblyman Marc Levine (CA-D-10) admits California firearm homicides were up between from 2014 to 2016. The bill says, “Although California has the toughest gun laws in the nation, more effort is necessary to curtail gun violence. The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation found that from 2014 to 2016 gun homicides increased 18 percent.” In light of this gun control failure the language of the bill goes on to suggest more gun control.

AWR Hawkins is an award-winning Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News, the host of the Breitbart podcast Bullets with AWR Hawkins, and the writer/curator of Down Range with AWR Hawkins, a weekly newsletter focused on all things Second Amendment, also for Breitbart News. He is the political analyst for Armed American Radio. Follow him on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com. Sign up to get Down Range at breitbart.com/downrange.

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.breitbart.com

Pollak: Robert Mueller, Media, Democrats Ignore Hillary Clinton’s Campaign Finance Violations


If we are to treat campaign finance reporting violations as grave offenses, the first person in the dock ought to be Hillary Clinton — not Donald Trump.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s sentencing memorandum for Michael Cohen on Friday repeated claims that Cohen violated campaign finance rules at the direction of then-candidate Donald Trump.

The media and their Greek chorus of Democrats are delighted, with incoming House Judiciary Chair Jerry Nadler (D-NY) calling the alleged crimes “impeachable offenses,” and incoming House Intelligence Chair Adam Schiff speculating about jail time.

It is not clear, however, that Trump broke the law.

First of all, the payment of “hush money” — the key issue — had a personal purpose quite separate from the campaign.

And as Alan Dershowitz noted when the claims first surfaced, “if Cohen was merely acting as a lawyer for Trump and advancing the payments, with an expectation of repayment, then it would be hard to find a campaign finance crime other than failure to report by the campaign.” He added: “Failure to report all campaign contributions is fairly common in political campaigns in the United States.”

Moreover, it is a matter of public record that the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) paid Fusion GPS via an intermediary, the Perkins Coie law firm, to conduct opposition research on Trump — which became the dubious Russia “dossier,” which led to the FBI investigation of Trump’s aides.

Furthermore, the Clinton campaign and the DNC falsely reported their expenditures to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) as “legal services.” The amount of money was in the range of several millions of dollars — more than ten times the $280,000 that Trump is alleged to have paid to women claiming to be his mistresses.

As Kimberly Strassel of the Wall Street Journal noted in August:

The Clinton campaign paid Fusion GPS to compile a dossier against Mr. Trump, a document that became the basis of the Russia narrative Mr. Mueller now investigates. But the campaign funneled the money to law firm Perkins Coie, which in turn paid Fusion. The campaign falsely described the money as payment for “legal services.” The Democratic National Committee did the same.

Prosecutors can claim all they want that they are applying the law equally, but if they only apply it to half the suspects, justice is not served. Mr. Mueller seems blind to the national need for—the basic expectation of—a thorough look into all parties.

Mueller is not the only one who is blind. The media and the Democrats are deliberately creating a double standard for one reason: to oust Trump — for a likely non-crime, unrelated to Russia “collusion.”

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.breitbart.com

ICE Arrests 105 Illegal Aliens In New Jersey Including Child Abusers, MS-13 Member, Internationally Wanted Criminals


ICE warned New Jersey. Update to this story.
More here.

Via Washington Examiner:

Foreign nationals from 24 countries — including four people with Interpol warrants for their arrests — were among the 105 arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement during a five-day sweep.

The agency announced the arrests Friday in a news release.

“Our focus has been and will continue to be on arrests of illegal aliens who have been convicted of serious crimes or those who pose a threat to public safety,” said John Tsoukaris, director of the Newark field office.

The people arrested ranged in age from 18 to 65 years old. The agency said more than 80 percent had either prior convictions or pending charges for a variety of crimes, including sexual assault on a minor, child abuse, possession of narcotics, distribution of narcotics, extortion, DUI, fraud, domestic violence, theft, possession of a weapon, robbery, promoting prostitution, aggravated assault, resisting arrest, endangering the welfare of a child, credit card fraud, insurance fraud, shoplifting, and illegal re-entry.

The agency said the pre-planned sweep targeted criminal aliens, illegal re-entrants, and other immigration violators.

Keep reading…

via Weasel Zippers

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.weaselzippers.us

Entertainer Digs Up Damning Information on Top Hollywood Celebrities, Uses it To Bury Them


Commentary Culture

Entertainer Digs Up Damning Information on Top Hollywood Celebrities, Uses it To Bury Them

(ttaniavolobueva / Shutterstock)Comedian Nick Cannon is calling out critics of comedian Kevin Hart’s jokes about gay people, pointing out several examples of hypocrisy. (taniavolobueva / Shutterstock)

English clergyman Frederick William Robertson best summed it up about hypocrisy.

“There are three things in the world that deserve no mercy: Hypocrisy, fraud, and tyranny,” Robertson famously said.

Hollywood, at least in 2018, seems to hit at least two of those check marks, if not all three.

As I’m sure you’ve heard by now, comedian Kevin Hart has been removed as the host of the Academy Awards telecast after internet sleuths dug up old comments he had made regarding gay people.

“One of my biggest fears is my son growing up and being gay. That’s a fear,” Hart said in his 2010 stand-up special “Seriously Funny.”

TRENDING: Now Dick’s Is Facing Actual Store Closures After Selling Out Gun Buyers

“Keep in mind, I’m not homophobic, I have nothing against gay people — be happy, do what you want to do,” Hart joked. “But me, being a heterosexual male, if I can prevent my son from being gay, I will. Now with that being said, I don’t know if I handled my son’s first gay moment correctly. Every kid has a gay moment, but when it happens, you’ve got to nip it in the bud.”

Hollywood, ever the self-proclaimed bastions of “tolerance,” pounced on Hart for his comments from eight years ago. Blind leftist followers similarly followed suit and attacked Hart, slamming him as a “clueless” bigot.

Not everyone in Hollywood was willing to attack Hart, however. Fellow comedian and entertainer Nick Cannon quickly took up the mantle to slam the fraudulent and hypocritical behavior of his peers.

“Interesting, I wonder if there was any backlash here,” Cannon pondered on Twitter in response to comedian Chelsea Handler flippantly using a gay slur to describe a photo of a bird.

Next, Cannon took aim at “Wreck It Ralph” voice actress and comedian Sarah Silverman, who also used a gay slur to describe a contestant on “The Bachelorette.”

Finally, Cannon called out comedian and actress Amy Schumer, who used a similar slur when talking to her Twitter followers about the movie “Skyfall.”

As Cannon pointed out, where was the outrage over these comments?

RELATED: Smug Amal Clooney Now Blaming Trump for Violence Against Journalists in Other Countries

Oh, that’s right, it was nowhere to be found.

Now, I don’t want to laud the notoriously anti-Trump Cannon too much here, but he certainly deserves credit for his willingness to lambaste his peers over their blatant hypocrisy.

One more thing worth noting is that Hart apologized on Twitter for his comments and to the gay community. The comedians that Cannon called out have offered no such remorse.

The way in which Hollywood elites pick and choose victims for their outrage of the week is nothing short of tyrannical.

And hey, that’s the Frederick William Robertson trifecta. Hollywood truly deserves no mercy.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

via Conservative Tribune

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.westernjournal.com/ct

Anthem Protesters Take Note: Trump Stands Strong with Army/Navy for Incredible National Anthem Rendition


Commentary Culture

Anthem Protesters Take Note: Trump Stands Strong with Army/Navy for Incredible National Anthem Rendition

President Donald Trump was on the field for the playing of the national anthem at Saturday's Army-Navy game in Philadelphia.Jim Watson / AFP / Getty ImagesPresident Donald Trump was on the field for the playing of the national anthem at Saturday’s Army-Navy game in Philadelphia. (Jim Watson / AFP / Getty Images)

As a huge football fan, few developments were more infuriating than the proliferation of anthem protests in the league.

Maybe the only thing other more infuriating was the sheer incompetence of NFL commissioner Roger Goodell in dealing with the protests, but that’s a lengthy rant for a different time.

To be fair, anthem protests within the NFL are at an all-time low since they began in 2016, and it’s probably not a coincidence that NFL ratings are on an upswing after some precipitous falls.

It certainly helps that the majority of NFL players are patriots (not of the New England variety.)

But even having just two players kneeling for the national anthem are two players too many.

TRENDING: Now Dick’s Is Facing Actual Store Closures After Selling Out Gun Buyers

Look, a part of me gets it — NFL players are well within their American rights to peaceably protest.

But there’s a time and a place for everything, and the national anthem simply isn’t the time or place for socio-political discourse.

You can’t blame the countless Americans who find the act of kneeling during the anthem to be the ultimate form of disrespect to the flag, the military and law enforcement.

But while the NFL continues to figure itself out, college football has been notably absent from such melodrama.

Will there still be NFL players protesting the national anthem next season?

In fact, college football’s reverence for the national anthem and the American flag was never more clear than the 119th game between the Army Black Knights and the Navy Midshipmen.

Army won its third straight game against Navy on Saturday with a solid 17-10 win, but the best moment came before a single snap was played.

President Donald Trump was in attendance for the game, and he has been as vocal of a critic of the NFL’s anthem protests as anyone.

Keeping his sharp NFL criticisms in mind, Trump was standing at full attention for the playing of the anthem before the Army-Navy game.

RELATED: Trump Has Crowd in Frenzy over Coin Toss, Then He Turns and Honors Every Captain on the Field

It was a truly beautiful and goosebump-inducing rendition of the anthem played before the game.

And to be clear, the anthem was made all the more amazing because the leader of this awesome country stood tall and proud for the anthem.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

via Conservative Tribune

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.westernjournal.com/ct