Posted on

Dem Rep Who Helped Set Impeachment Rules Was Previously Impeached for Bribery, Perjury and More

Democratic Florida Rep. Alcee Hastings is the vice chairman of the House Committee on Rules, the folks who set the guidelines for Wednesday’s impeachment vote. Unsurprisingly, they did so along a 9-4 party-line vote, refusing to allow any amendments on the floor and limiting debate time to six hours.

As for impeachment, Hastings knows a thing or two about the process. In 1989, as a Florida federal district court judge, he was impeached and removed from office for bribery, perjury and falsifying evidence.

On Tuesday, the Rules Committee set the parameters for debate on impeachment, in what CBS News called a “contentious but comparatively collegial” session.

I’m not quite sure what that even means anymore in the context of Washington, considering these were some of the comments from Hastings that passed as “comparatively collegial”:

“The president’s actions, in your words, were so wrong,” Hastings said, according to the Palm Beach Post, referring to remarks made by committee chairman Rep. Jim McGovern, a Massachusetts Democrat, the previous day.

TRENDING: As San Fran Streets Fill with Human Waste, Grocery Store Aisle Turns Into Toilet

“It’s hard for me to believe that all of us here do not all understand that. But the die is pretty much cast.”

As for Republicans who didn’t see what Trump did as trying to induce a foreign leader to influence an American election: “I just can’t believe you people,” Hastings said.

He probably wasn’t the guy who should have been talking.

In the later years of the Carter administration, Hastings was appointed as a federal judge for the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. He was commissioned in 1979. It took him a grand total of two years to find himself enmeshed in bribery charges.

Do you think Donald Trump will be impeached and removed from office?

0% (0 Votes)

100% (4 Votes)

In 1981, Hastings was indicted on charges he took $150,000 from mob-connected defendants to reduce their sentences. His alleged co-conspirator, William A. Borders, was convicted. Hastings, however, was acquitted in 1983 and returned to being a federal judge.

Status quo ante, right? Well, not exactly.

“Subsequently, suspicions arose that Hastings had lied and falsified evidence during the trial in order to obtain an acquittal,” a synopsis of the case on the U.S. Senate’s website reads.

“A special committee of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals began a new probe into the Hastings case. The resulting three-year investigation ended with the panel concluding that Hastings did indeed commit perjury, tamper with evidence, and conspire to gain financially by accepting bribes. The panel recommended further action to the U.S. Judicial Conference, which, in turn, informed the House of Representatives on March 17, 1987, that Judge Alcee Hastings should be impeached and removed from office.”

Also, it wasn’t quite a party-line vote in the House. According to National Public Radio, the House voted by a margin of 413-3 to pass on 17 articles of impeachment to the Senate — “the greatest number of articles in any impeachment proceeding to date,” according to the Senate case synopsis.

RELATED: Old Documents Show George Washington & Trump Would Have Agreed on Executive Privilege

The Senate sent the matter to a special committee, which found there was convincing evidence to the effect that Bowers and Hastings had conspired to receive the bribe. Hastings tried to get the matter dismissed and argued a Senate trial constituted double jeopardy. Both motions were denied.

“The trial committee presented its report on October 2, 1989. Sixteen days later, the trial began in the U.S. Senate, with prosecution and defense given two hours to summarize their cases. The Senate deliberated in closed session on October 19, 1989,” the synopsis read.

“The following day, the Senate voted on 11 of the 17 articles of impeachment, convicting Hastings, by the necessary two-thirds vote, on 8 articles (1-5, 7-9). On two articles (6, 17) the vote fell short of the required majority to convict. On article 11, the Senate voted 95 not guilty to 0 guilty. Having achieved the necessary majority vote to convict on 8 articles, the Senate’s president pro tempore (Robert C. Byrd) ordered Hastings removed from office. The Senate did not vote to disqualify him from holding future office.”

On that last part: whoops.

Hastings sued to get the case tossed out but was unsuccessful. After an unsuccessful bid to become the secretary of state of Florida, he finally made his comeback by winning a seat in the House in 1992.

To be fair, Hastings hasn’t faced any allegations of corruption during his two-and-a-half decades in the lower house, although it hasn’t been blemish-free. In the wake of the John Conyers scandal, it was revealed Congress had paid out $220,000 to settle a sexual harassment suit against Hastings in which the complainant alleged the Florida Democrat invited a woman to his hotel room, asked her questions about the undergarments she was wearing and made other gestures toward her you can probably take a guess at.

Another controversy arose in the months before the 2008 presidential election when he gave a collegial assessment of the GOP’s vice presidential candidate to the National Jewish Democratic Council: “If Sarah Palin isn’t enough of a reason for you to get over whatever your problem is with Barack Obama, then you damn well had better pay attention,” Hastings said. “Anybody toting guns and stripping moose don’t care too much about what they do with Jews and blacks. So, you just think this through.”

He would quickly apologize, as you might expect.

So, has this given Hastings any self-awareness about the part he’s playing at the moment? Does he realize that if this were about integrity, Hastings would be out of politics and we’d have had an impeachment inquiry that was something more than a vulgarized, streamlined, made-for-TV extravaganza? Does he realize that, at the very least, he shouldn’t be the one setting the rules for impeachment when he’s been impeached and removed himself?

At least judging by his remarks Tuesday, no. However, there was an interesting bit in an interview he did with the Palm Beach Post earlier this year.

“Impeachment is as partisan as hell,” Hastings said. “I know it because I’ve lived it.”

Of course, Hastings’ impeachment was profoundly bipartisan. You don’t get a 413-3 vote in the House of Representatives on a party-line basis. Trump’s has been, and will continue to be, “partisan as hell.” Thanks for admitting that much, I guess.

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

via The Western Journal

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

Posted on

Levin: How impeachment is really about blocking another Trump SCOTUS pick

Monday on the radio, LevinTV host Mark Levin gave credit to his neighbor for making a very good point about the impeachment effort against President Donald Trump. Levin said his neighbor believes that the Democrats want to impeach Trump to have an excuse not to let him appoint another justice to the Supreme Court — whether he wins re-election or not.

“I’ll bet he’s right. I’ll bet that’s part of the calculation,” Levin said. “That they want to claim that they’ve crippled this lawless president, that the Republicans wouldn’t remove him from office, and there is no way that the Democrats will ever agree to him making another Supreme Court appointment, either in the next eleven months or, as I say, should he get re-elected and in the four years subsequent to his first term.”

Listen:

Don’t miss an episode of LevinTV. Sign up now!

The post Levin: How impeachment is really about blocking another Trump SCOTUS pick appeared first on Conservative Review.

via Conservative Review

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

Posted on

Pollak: House Democrats Violated the First, Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments in Impeachment Inquiry

House Democrats violated the Bill of Rights in pursuing their impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump. Republicans have pointed out that Democrats’ articles of impeachment, especially the second article charging “obstruction of Congress,” punish the president for obeying the Constitution’s checks-and-balances.

Yet Democrats have also violated the basic liberties protected by the Bill of Rights, in the following four ways:

First Amendment: House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA), which led the impeachment inquiry, released a 300-page report in which he printed phone logs purportedly belonging to Ranking Member Devin Nunes (R-CA), presidential lawyer Rudy Giuliani, and journalist John Solomon. Schiff has never made clear what authority granted him the power to snoop on a journalist (among others) — a violation of freedom of the press.

Fourth Amendment: Schiff’s snooping on phone logs violated the protection against “unreasonable searches and seizures.” As the Wall Street Journal‘s Kim Strassel has noted, “Federal law bars phone carriers from handing over records without an individual’s agreement.” There are exceptions for legitimate law enforcement investigations, but there is no exception for lawmakers, and Schiff’s inquiry had no law enforcement purpose; no crime was alleged.

Fifth Amendment: President Trump was denied the due process rights guaranteed to his predecessors in prior impeachment inquiries. Unlike Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, for example, he was denied legal representation in the fact-finding stage of the inquiry. He was also told at the outset that any effort to invoke constitutional rights or privileges would itself be considered further evidence of an impeachable offense.

Sixth Amendment: Democrats violated the president’s right to counsel when they snooped on Giuliani’s phone records, even making a public record of his conversations with the White House, potentially violating attorney-client privilege. Moreover, by refusing to allow the so-called “whistleblower” to testify — and silencing questions about the “whistleblower” — Democrats denied Trump the right to confront his accuser before being impeached.

Democrats have argued that at least some of these rights only apply in a criminal trial, not an impeachment inquiry — and that if they were to apply to impeachment, it would only be in the trial phase, in the Senate, not in the House.

But impeachment — as Democrats have themselves argued — is itself a sanction that is meant, in their view, to deter misconduct. It is a penalty in and of itself, and the president is therefore entitled to all constitutional protections.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He earned an A.B. in Social Studies and Environmental Science and Public Policy from Harvard College, and a J.D. from Harvard Law School. 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

Posted on

Faculty Union Rips Conservative Student Group That Was Attacked by the Left

The executive board of the California Faculty Association, Chico Chapter said, deep into a recent dispatch about battles between leftist students and College Republicans at Chico State University, that “the hypocrisy of right-wing political voices crying out that they are being silenced is absurd. No one in authority is silencing them.”

This came at the tail end of a dispatch from the educators union in which:

a) It completely elided the fact that College Republicans had been assaulted by these leftist students.

b) It claimed that the very name of the president “was actually a signal and symbol of insult, derision, and ridicule of specific groups within our society.”

c) It said the College Republicans, much like Donald Trump, were associated “with white supremacist ideas.”

TRENDING: Rep. Gaetz Wins Impeachment Hearing with Biden-Burisma-Hertz Car Rental Slam

d) It created a “context” for the assaults in which “acts of harassment and even physical abuse on the basis of race, gender, and perceived sexual orientation” had been ongoing.

So, if you think there’s any silencing of right-wing political voices on campus, don’t worry. These are the nonpartisan defenders of free speech in academia who will ensure conservatives don’t face discrimination based on their views.

In case you missed it, the whole thing went viral when the College Republicans at Chico State were going to host a #WalkAway event featuring movement founder Brandon Straka.

As organizations are wont to do on college campuses, the College Republicans promoted the event through “tabling” — the old-fashioned campus recruitment method of putting out a table and trying to get people to join the club and come to the event.

Some activists didn’t like this and, according to TheBlaze, harassed them via loud music.

At one point, one of the activists produced a “Black Trans Lives Matter” sign and stood in protest. Michael Curry, president of Chico State’s College Republicans, got up with a sign that said “All Lives Matter” and stood beside her. Hilarity and/or assault transpired.

WARNING: The following videos contain vulgar language that some viewers may find offensive.

Even though the conservative wasn’t really that close to her, the liberal shouted, “Get the f— out of my f—ing face!” while ripping the sign out of the conservative’s hand and attempting to hit him.

RELATED: Anti-Trump Film Professor’s Quiz Question Equates President with KKK

Things didn’t get any better when Straka came to campus, either.

Yeah, there’s nothing that’s going to make your point as eloquently and as tolerantly as saying of Straka that “his mom should’ve had a f—ing abortion.”

If you want more of what’s been happening to conservative students at Chico State, you can look at Michael Curry’s Twitter account.

But maybe there’s another side to all this, which is what the California Faculty Association, Chico Chapter wanted to set out to prove in its dispatch.

Or, in the group’s words, it was going to offer “some responses to the white supremacist ideas expressed on our campus in the week before the Thanksgiving Holiday.”

Do you think conservatives are discriminated against on college campuses?

100% (2 Votes)

0% (0 Votes)

“We are living in strange times when a student organization displaying banners and signs supporting reelection of the sitting president can be experienced as an act of racist provocation, but we must be honest,” the letter, issued Tuesday, read.

“There has not been another president in US history whose very name was actually a signal and symbol of insult, derision, and ridicule of specific groups within our society. It would be disingenuous to deny that Trump has this impact as he is clearly associated, by design, with white supremacist ideas. Further, the recent release of emails from White House Aid Stephen Miller demonstrate that he has promoted white supremacist ideas in his communications.”

Miller, indeed, is at the center of some controversy for alleged emails he sent during his time as communications director for then-Sen. Jeff Sessions. The rest of that is arrant nonsense, liberal puffery and standard-issue guilt by association.

“Some aspects of this situation are simple,” the letter continued. “Student organizations absolutely may reserve space for a booth that displays their candidate’s name. There can be no question that such political speech is absolutely protected by the First Amendment. But the problem happens when we stop the conversation at this single, obvious point.

“While the conversations we need to have — on campus and throughout our society — must include the parameters of protected First Amendment speech (and what time/place/manner restrictions are permitted and appropriate under various circumstances), the conversations must not be limited to those principles.

“To fail to acknowledge the context in which the protests on campus in November occurred does a disservice to the members of our campus community who have been targeted by ongoing acts of harassment and even physical abuse on the basis of race, gender, and perceived sexual orientation in the past weeks and months. The context of this targeting and harassment, and the failure to respond effectively to fully acknowledge the harms being done and to fully protect these students, staff, and faculty from hateful comments and actions, adds insult to injury and leaves many in our community frustrated and demoralized.”

Now, at no point are any statistics of these “ongoing acts of harassment and even physical abuse” documented or are examples provided. Unlike the videos on Curry’s Twitter account, there isn’t corroboration here.

However, the CFA assures us that “[t]o many students it appears that discipline has been meted out quickly with unseemly haste against students who object to racism, while consequences for the racist provocateurs has been muted.”

“We must do better at protecting targeted students from the harmful impacts of ignorant racist, sexist, and other oppressive behavior and speech,” the letter said. “We stand with our students. We see the efforts to provoke them. We see the insults. We are here to work with them to create responses that allow them to express their frustration, even their rage, at such insult and threats in a manner that does not set them up to be punished.  Such punishment reinforces the long history this society has of silencing minority voices.

“Finally, the hypocrisy of right-wing political voices crying out that they are being silenced is absurd. No one in authority is silencing them. Rejecting the abusive, insulting, and corrupt president/candidate they support is not punishment. They face no disciplinary sanction for such demonstrations (and have not even been punished for the far more harmful and disgraceful off-campus events they have arranged in which targeted groups and individuals are ridiculed and harassed).

“But just because they have a right to express their views does not in any way mean we have to sit by, silently, and pretend that such views are not offensive and even provoking to many members of our community. Because, make no mistake, they are.”

In short, because ideas are “provoking,” all of what happened is all right. The harassment, up to and including assault, of conservative students, since it didn’t happen in a vacuum, ought to be excused.

Now, the CFA is a union, which means (wonder of wonders) its take on this skews toward the left. But there’s the rub: This is a union comprised of educators at state universities in California. In other words, this is the official opinion of the collective bargaining organ of the men and women who teach these students. The very name “Trump” to them is a white-supremacist insult. If you’re a College Republican, guess what that makes you.

There’s a strange, discomfiting irony in the fact that the CFA set out to prove, in part, “the hypocrisy of right-wing political voices crying out that they are being silenced” on public university campuses in California.

If that’s what they expected the takeaway would be, perhaps they ought to have re-read this one before they clicked send.

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

via The Western Journal

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

Posted on

Trump Rips Debate Commission, Raising Doubts About Whether He’ll Participate

President Trump on Monday ripped the Commission on Presidential Debates, which will oversee all debates in the 2020 presidential election.

In a trio of posts on Twitter, Trump said he hadn’t yet decided if he would participate in the commission’s debates.

“I look very much forward to debating whoever the lucky person is who stumbles across the finish line in the little watched Do Nothing Democrat Debates. My record is so good on the Economy and all else, including debating, that perhaps I would consider more than 3 debates,” Trump wrote in his first post.

“The problem is that the so-called Commission on Presidential Debates is stacked with Trump Haters & Never Trumpers. 3 years ago they were forced to publicly apologize for modulating my microphone in the first debate against Crooked Hillary. As President, the debates are up … to me, and there are many options, including doing them directly & avoiding the nasty politics of this very biased Commission. I will make a decision at an appropriate time but in the meantime, the Commission on Presidential Debates is NOT authorized to speak for me (or R’s)!” he wrote in the next two.

Trump’s comments came days after The New York Times reported that the president and his advisers have discussed possibly skipping the general election debates next year because they don’t trust the commission to pick fair moderators.

The Commission has announced debates will take place at the University of Notre Dame on Sept. 29, at 2020 at the University of Michigan on Oct. 15 and at Belmont University on Oct. 22.

The Commission defended itself after Trump’s comments.

“The televised general election debates are an important part of our democratic process,” the commission said. “Since 1988, the Commission on Presidential Debates has conducted 30 general election presidential and vice presidential debates. Our record is one of fairness, balance and non-partisanship.”

The post Trump Rips Debate Commission, Raising Doubts About Whether He’ll Participate appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

via The Gateway Pundit

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

Posted on

WATCH: Trump Shares Richard Jewell Testimony Denouncing FBI, Fake News Media: ‘Criminal Organizations,’ ‘Tyrants’

On Monday, President Donald Trump shared a poignant clip of maligned hero Richard Jewell testifying before Congress in 1997 and demanding the FBI issue him a formal apology for falsely fingering him as a suspect in the 1996 Atlanta Summer Olympic Games bombing.

The president approvingly quote-tweeted a post from the Twitter user “Steph,” who argued that Richard Jewell’s treatment at the hands of the FBI and the fake news media parallels President Trump’s own treatment. Steph denounced both organizations as “tyrants” and “criminal organizations.”

“This is Richard Jewell. Listen to him. President Trump could read the same statement,” said Steph. “The FBI & their media partners are criminal organizations under the guise of ‘keeping us safe’ They are tyrants and it isn’t new.”

In the two-minute clip, a noticeably shaken and timid Richard Jewell denounces his treatment at the hands of both the media and the FBI, taking specific aim at the government institution for actively seeking to ruin his life in spite of the truth. Here’s the full transcript:

 I come before you today, not as a Republican or a Democrat. I have no political agenda. I come before you simply as an American citizen with rights just like everybody else. One year ago today, the FBI and the media joined together to launch an attack on me of unparalleled proportions in the history of this nation. An attack calculated to portray me to the world as some kind of abnormal person, with a bizarre employment history who was guilty of the Centennial Olympic Park bombing. It was all a lie.

Two days ago, the Justice Department issued a written report about its investigation into a few of the unlawful acts committed by the FBI in its investigation of me. While I have not had an opportunity to study the report in detail,  I did read a redacted summary yesterday. I submit to you that the Justice Department cannot be trusted to investigate itself because that report is also a lie. It is filled with false statements, half-truths, and gross distortions of the truth. Reading it reminded me of reading the FBI search warrant affidavit against me. Apparently, truth for the Justice Department is simply whatever the Justice Department wants the truth to me. Within a few days, after my name was leaked to the media, the FBI knew it had a public relations disaster on its hands. The organization that prided itself on being the best investigative agency in the world had quickly, and with the word watching, pointed the federal government’s finger of guilt at the wrong man and they knew it within days. Not only did the FBI accuse the wrong man — its agents in Atlanta, and officials in Washington, actively participated in publicly humiliating me.

Richard Jewell became a national hero during the 1996 Summer Olympic Games in Atlanta, Georgia, when he discovered a bomb planted in Centennial Park. Risking his own life, Jewell successfully helped to evacuate the area, saving countless lives before the bomb detonated. As a result of his heroic feats, only one person died in the blast (a second person later died of a heart attack) while 111 people were injured.

Though first hailed for his triumphant efforts, things quickly turned sour for Jewell the moment the media learned that the FBI was investigating him as a potential suspect, believing he may have planted the bomb himself in order to gain notoriety.

Director Clint Eastwood’s movie chronicling Richard Jewell’s harrowing fight went nationwide last Friday.

via The Daily Wire

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

Posted on

Nolte: Michigan Swing Voters ‘Have Virtually Zero Trust In Media’s Coverage’ of Trump

The far-left Axios reports that Michigan swing voters not only hate impeachment, they “have virtually zero trust in the media’s coverage of” President Trump.

Smart people.

Yep, as the national impeachment polling continues to move against the media and Democrats, at the swing state level things look even more dire for America’s Ukraine Hoaxsters.

And these are not just any swing voters in Michigan, this focus group was made up of voters who supported President Obama before moving over to Trump in 2016.

In other words, these are the voters the Democrat Party and fake media are counting on to come back home in 2020, to return to the Democrat fold and defeat Trump’s re-election chances. Well, they are not coming home. They are no longer Obama/Trump voters. They are now just Trump voters.

“Some swing voters here who voted for Barack Obama and then Donald Trump are firmly in Trump’s camp now — and they’re sick of impeachment,” Axios reports, adding, “These voters hate the fact that House Democrats are moving toward impeaching the president. They call it a distraction from the issues that would actually improve their lives.”

Those issues include “preserving Social Security, cracking down on illegal immigration, and keeping jobs in the U.S.”

“They have virtually zero trust in the media’s coverage of” Trump and “credit Trump with making health care more affordable.”

They explained that Trump’s tax cut “saved them more in taxes so they can now reallocate that money to pay for prescription drugs.”

The focus group was taken in Saginaw County, Michigan, a crucially important swing county in a crucially important swing state. Obama won the county by 12 points in 2012; Trump won it by only a single point. Michigan had been part of the Democrats’ Rustbelt firewall, at least until Trump won Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan in 2016.

According to Axios, only two of the focus group participants said they will “definitely” vote for Trump next year, but none of them are “excited by any of the 2020 Democrats, and no one signaled an interest in supporting a Democratic candidate.”

The best news here, of course, is that these former Obama voters can no longer be fooled by the fake news media. After four years of hoaxes and lies — the Russia Hoax, Brett Kavanaugh: Serial Rapist Hoax, KKKovington KKKids Hoax, endless hate crime hoaxes, and now the Ukraine Hoax — the swing voters have moved from believers to skeptical to non-believers, which is quite a leap for former Obama supporters, and a resounding rejection of the media.

The American people are waking up to the truth about the corrupt and rigged media, and not a moment to soon.

Does anyone honestly believe America’s working class is going to continue to support a political party that can no longer tell the difference between men and women?

Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC. Follow his Facebook Page here.

via Breitbart News

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

Posted on

BREAKING: Judge Rejects Flynn Lawyer Sidney Powell’s Request For Brady Material – Sets Sentencing For January 28


General Mike Flynn

Mr. President, please pardon General Mike Flynn!

Federal Judge Emmet Sullivan on Monday rejected Sidney Powell’s request for additional Brady Material and announced Flynn will be sentenced on January 28.

General Flynn was railroaded by the Deep State, FBI and crooked Mueller team — he has spent an exorbitant amount of money defending himself.

The FBI ambushed Flynn at the White House during the Trump transition and altered the 302 FBI reports from the ambush interview.

Flynn didn’t even has his lawyer with him because the FBI didn’t inform him that he was being targeted.

CNBC reported:

Michael Flynn, the Army general who briefly served as President Donald Trump’s first national security advisor, will be sentenced for lying to the FBI on Jan. 28, a judge said Monday.

The sentencing date was set after Judge Emmet Sullivan rejected Flynn’s repeated requests to compel prosecutors to turn over additional evidence in his criminal case.

General Mike Flynn’s lawyer Sidney Powell in October filed a motion demanding the Justice Department produce Brady Material that has recently come into the DOJ’s possession which includes 2 phones (BlackBerrys) used by Deep State spy Joseph Mifsud.

As we reported in mid-September, Sidney Powell gave us a clue regarding the Deep State’s actions in setting up members of the Trump team.

Powell requested that the US government provide her and her client, General Mike Flynn, documents related to Deep State spy Joseph Mifsud from an event in late 2015.

Powell referred to “302s” regarding the dinner event in 2015 that General Flynn attended, which means that the FBI was interviewing Mifsud as early as 2015 and knew EXACTLY who Mifsud was and was not before Papadopoulos ever met Mifsud.

Sidney Powell previously demanded the DOJ “produce evidence that has only recently come into [the DOJ’s] possession. This evidence includes the data and metadata of the following two devices:”

“This information is material, exculpatory, and relevant to the defense of Mr. Flynn, and specifically to the “OCONUS LURES” and agents that western intelligence tasked against him likely as early as 2014 to arrange — unbeknownst to him — “connection” with certain Russians that they would then use against him in their false claims. The phones were used by Mr. Joseph Mifsud.” Powell said in a Tuesday court filing.

Powell added, “Mr. Flynn is entitled to this information under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 87 (1963).

Joseph Mifsud, a Maltese professor, was also used by the Deep State to set up Trump’s former foreign policy campaign advisor George Papadopoulos.

US Attorney General Bill Barr and US Attorney from Connecticut John Durham better get to the bottom of exactly who Joseph Mifsud is and how the US government used him to take down Trump and his associates, including General Flynn.

DEVELOPING…

The post BREAKING: Judge Rejects Flynn Lawyer Sidney Powell’s Request For Brady Material – Sets Sentencing For January 28 appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

via The Gateway Pundit

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

Posted on

REPORT: Black Voter Support for Trump at Record Level for Republican President, Could Seal Reelection in 2020

This could explain the mad dash by Democrats to impeach Trump and try to remove him from office.

Support for Trump among black voters is higher than any other Republican president has ever enjoyed. Democrats know this would spell doom for them at the polls next November. They must be terrified.

The Washington Examiner reports:

Black voter support for Trump at ‘highest levels,’ could seal 2020 win

Kanye West isn’t the only one anymore.

A growing number of polls show that President Trump is gaining the support of black voters above what any Republican president has ever received. Both Emerson Polling and Rasmussen Reports have it at about 34%, a stunning number.

And a new Zogby Analytics survey found that African American support is at the “highest levels of the year,” driven by a strong economy, historically low black unemployment, and Trump’s agenda to support minority small businesses, historically black colleges and universities, and passage of criminal justice reform.

“Not surprisingly, all African Americans do not hate Trump!” pollster Jonathan Zogby said in sharing his data with us.

But Trump critics don’t buy it. Democratic and Barack Obama pollster Cornell Belcher is one. He rejected the reasoning that black support is growing and suggested that the polls are wrong.

“Those reasons would assume that it’s real, which it isn’t. To have a conversation about the reason is giving it credibility,” he said.

It makes perfect sense that some Democrats would be in complete denial over this. They still don’t even understand how Trump won in 2016.

Meanwhile, Trump is actively courting black voters.

Politico reported:

Trump shocks black voters — by trying to get their votes

The Westside Gazette bills itself as “Broward County’s oldest and largest African American owned-and-operated newspaper.” For five decades, the Fort Lauderdale, Fla. weekly has catered to a staunchly Democratic readership.

So when readers opened an edition last month to find a full-page ad from President Donald Trump’s reelection campaign, many couldn’t believe it. Why would he even bother?

“I thought it was quite abnormal,” said Bobby Henry, the newspaper’s publisher and CEO. He said a reader sought him out at church last weekend to ask what was up. “For [Trump] to reach out to the broader African American community is what surprised me.”

Yet that’s precisely what Trump is doing.

The president’s reelection campaign has spent $1 million in an effort to make inroads with black voters, and more is coming, according to a person with direct knowledge of the planning.

Statistically speaking, Trump only needs to move the needle a few points with black voters and Democrats are toast.

Knowing this, doesn’t their obvious panic make perfect sense?

The post REPORT: Black Voter Support for Trump at Record Level for Republican President, Could Seal Reelection in 2020 appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

via The Gateway Pundit

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

Posted on

Hallmark Caves to Leftist Mob, Says They Will Reinstate Lesbian Commercial and Partner With GLAAD

Hallmark has caved to a leftist outrage mob after pulling an ad featuring a lesbian kiss and is now facing endless demands for “inclusion” and “representation.”

As we all know, when you cave to the left, show weakness, and give an inch — they demand a mile.

The Hallmark Channel is known for their wholesome content, especially their Christmas movies. They are predictably sweet, sappy and family friendly.

The Zola ad that sparked the outrage featured two brides kissing at the altar and was swiftly pulled from the channel after complaints from the conservative group One Million Moms. Naturally, the move lead to a Twitter uprising from people who are not even part of the network’s demographics. Ellen DeGeneres and William Shatner both took aim at the company over the decision.

The LGBTQ lobbying organization GLAAD also chimed in with their resentment and outrage, saying in a statement that removing the ads was “discriminatory and especially hypocritical coming from a network that claims to present family programming and and also recently stated they are ‘open’ to LGBTQ holiday movies.”

Unfortunately, Hallmark quickly caved to the pressure on social media.

“The Crown Media team has been agonizing over this decision as we’ve seen the hurt it has unintentionally caused. Said simply, they believe this was the wrong decision,” Hallmark Cards CEO Mike Perry said in the statement. “We are truly sorry for the hurt and disappointment this has caused.”

Hallmark movies, particularly the Christmas movies that they are famous for, usually have a pretty standard formula. City girl ends up in a small town for Christmas, meets a hunky stud muffin who works at a Christmas tree farm, and realizes she has had her life’s priorities all wrong. They always live happily ever after. They are predictable and delightful. But, like all things wholesome and family oriented, the left wants to change and destroy them.

Of course, it won’t stop with the commercial.

In the statement announcing that they caved, the network said that they will be “working with GLAAD to better represent the LGBTQ community” and will be reaching out to Zola to reestablish its partnership and reinstate the commercials.

Apparently these companies did not notice the fall of Gillette.

Get woke, go broke.

The post Hallmark Caves to Leftist Mob, Says They Will Reinstate Lesbian Commercial and Partner With GLAAD appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

via The Gateway Pundit

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