Month: January 2018

Posted on

Conservatives Erupt over Betsy DeVos Announcement: ‘Common Core Is Dead’

U.S. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos continues to struggle with the conservative base of the GOP as she again declares, “Common Core is dead.”

“I agree – and have always agreed – with President Trump on this: ‘Common Core is a disaster,’” DeVos allied herself with Trump last week during a major policy speech at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI). “And at the U.S. Department of Education, Common Core is dead.”

The secretary’s statement led Alex Newman of the Freedom Project to write:

Despite blasting federal overreach in education and making other statements sure to delight conservatives and constitutionalists, U.S. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos continued to mislead Americans on Common Core last week. Indeed, despite the dumbed-down national standards still being in place in almost every state, DeVos falsely claimed that Common Core was “dead” at the Department of Education.

In yet another address that at least superficially put forward sound statements reflecting the Constitution’s lack of mention of any federal role in education, DeVos has again failed to convince the base of her party that she actually believes this fact.

Indeed, the education secretary gave a good conservative run-down of the George W. Bush and Obama administrations’ contributions to entrenching the federal government further into education policy via No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and Common Core:

Where the Bush administration emphasized NCLB’s stick, the Obama administration focused on carrots. They recognized that states would not be able to legitimately meet the NCLB’s strict standards. Secretary Duncan testified that 82 percent of the nation’s schools would likely fail to meet the law’s requirements — thus subjecting them to crippling sanctions.

The Obama administration dangled billions of dollars through the “Race to the Top” competition, and the grant-making process not so subtly encouraged states to adopt the Common Core State Standards. With a price tag of nearly four and a half billion dollars, it was billed as the “largest-ever federal investment in school reform.” Later, the Department would give states a waiver from NCLB’s requirements so long as they adopted the Obama administration’s preferred policies — essentially making law while Congress negotiated the reauthorization of ESEA.

However, as Shane Vander Hart writes at Truth in American Education, the “reauthorization of ESEA,” i.e., the “bipartisan” Every Student Succeeds Act – engineered by Sens. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) and Patty Murray (D-WA) – essentially cemented Common Core into every state in the country:

Sure, the U.S. Department of Education is not actively pushing Common Core, they don’t need to. The standards and assessment consortiums don’t need to be funded anymore. The damage is done.

They don’t need to publicly push it because ESSA essentially codified Common Core.

At best, DeVos’s views on Common Core are murky, and conservatives have never been sold on her statement that she has “always agreed” with Trump that Common Core is a “disaster.” In fact, DeVos never was a fan of Trump and actually served as an at-large delegate of Common Core supporter John Kasich at the GOP convention in 2016.

American Principles Project senior fellows Jane Robbins and Emmett McGroarty write at Townhall:

Especially in her home state of Michigan, conservatives were discouraged by DeVos’s nomination because of her past support of Common Core and her efforts (through organizations she founded and/or funded) to thwart the parents who opposed them. She disavowed her previous support and then sought to put the issue to bed by simply declaring, mistakenly, that “the Every Student Succeeds Act [ESSA] . . . essentially does away with the whole argument about Common Core.”

As Robbins and McGroarty note, in April 2017, the secretary actually said during a Fox News interview, “There really isn’t any Common Core anymore.”

“The Every Student Succeeds Act, which is in the process of being implemented now, essentially does away with the whole argument about Common Core,” she added.

DeVos’s pronouncements that Common Core is “dead” seem disconnected from reality to parents across the country.

Education Week reported, “at least 37 states” are still using the Common Core standards or its “rebrands” – renaming the Core with a state-friendly title – as of the end of 2016.

Meanwhile, Education Dive notes Timothy Shanahan, a professor emeritus at the University of Illinois at Chicago – and one of the authors of the Core, says the standards are still in effect in 42 states.

“Even if Common Core were ripped out from the roots, the federally controlled government ‘education’ system in America would continue to dumb down and indoctrinate students on an industrial scale—literally threatening the future of the nation,” Newman writes.

In dulcet conservative tones, DeVos also announced during her AEI address that federal mandates are not working to improve education. The thousands of parents fighting against Common Core in their states for years now have been saying that to establishment Republican and Democratic lawmakers – but to no avail.

DeVos herself, however, continues to plug ESSA – a federal mandate.

“Under ESSA, school leaders, educators and parents have the latitude and freedom to try new approaches to serve individual students,” she said. “My message to them is simple: do it!”

Vander Hart asserts DeVos should heed her own advice.

“That’s a nice sentiment, but what is Secretary DeVos going to do about it?” he asks. “If this is something she truly believed she would support the repeal of ESEA instead of touting it in its current form as the Every Student Succeeds Act.”

A big part of conservatives’ problem with DeVos is the fact that she has invited many followers of her close friend Jeb Bush to advise her. Bush has been a primary supporter of Common Core and school choice.

Robbins and McGroarty observe that while DeVos has declared Common Core “dead,” she has followed Bush’s lead in the areas of school choice – without detailing the mechanisms for bringing about the “choice,” and “digital” or “personalized” learning – which is a major platform for student data collection.

“She didn’t mention the central problem with [school choice],” the authors write. “[T]he danger that when the money follows the child, government regulations will be close behind to strip private schools of the characteristics that made them appealing to parents in the first place.”

The authors add:

[S]o-called personalized learning is actually depersonalized, computerized training rather than genuine education. It replaces a liberal arts education with pared-down workforce-development training that concentrates on “skills” corporations deem necessary for the (current) job market. It props children in front of computer screens that feed them curricula (probably not available for parental review) that children can click through without really learning anything. It indoctrinates children with government-approved attitudes, mindsets, and beliefs. It collects literally millions of data points on children that will allow the government and vendors to create profiles and algorithms that may control each child’s future life path. It minimizes human interaction, converting professional educators into data clerks.

Of course, ESSA is fully on board with digital learning and DeVos is fully on board with ESSA.

Constitutionalists note that until DeVos can put into action the words she apparently believes make sense to Trump’s constituents, she will continue to have battles with both the left and the conservative wing of her own party.

“If DeVos is sincere about her philosophical rhetoric, she will devote her efforts to three things: freeing the states from all federal mandates to the extent she can under the law; working with Congress to revise ESSA to eliminate all mandates; and creating a workable plan to shut down her department,” Robbins and McGroarty write. “That would be something conservatives can cheer.”

Newman warns, however: “T]he fact that DeVos continues to dishonestly try to mislead Americans into believing Common Core is ‘dead’ should alarm everyone. It’s way past time to shut down the whole unconstitutional Education Department.”

via Breitbart News

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

Posted on

Trump Thanks CNN’s Jim Acosta for Admitting Dems ‘Gambled and Lost’ With Govt. Shutdown

President Donald Trump took to Twitter late Monday night to label the end of the government shutdown a "big win" for Republicans and to thank CNN chief White House correspondent Jim Acosta for saying Democrats "caved" and "lost."

While Trump called the government funding deal a win for Republicans, he also said he wants a big win for "everyone," including Republicans, Democrats, and the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.

"Should be able to get there. See you at the negotiating table!" Trump said.

Tuesday morning, he thanked "Crazy Jim Acosta" for painting the reopening of the government as a win for Trump and Republicans.

"Thank you for your honesty Jim!" Trump said.

The vote to fund the government for three weeks, ending the shutdown, was 81-18 in the Senate. Of the 16 Democrats who voted against the measure, four have been floated as potential 2020 contenders.

The post Trump Thanks CNN’s Jim Acosta for Admitting Dems ‘Gambled and Lost’ With Govt. Shutdown appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.

via Washington Free Beacon

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://freebeacon.com

Posted on

Illegals in California with Driver’s Licenses Eligible to Vote After April 1

Starting on April 1, 2018, illegal aliens in California who have recently obtained state driver’s licenses legally, or obtained them previously by lying about their immigration status, will automatically be registered to vote.  Since January 2015, according to the California DMV, A.B. 60, a law passed by the California Assembly, “allows illegal immigrants to the United States to apply for a California driver’s license with the CA Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV)” [emphasis original].  As of December 2016, more than 800,000 California driver’s licenses were issued to illegal aliens under the A.B. 60 law. Additional thousands of illegals may have been granted licenses prior to 2015 because they lied on their driver’s license application forms and claimed they were in the country legally.  (No proof of legal residence has been required by the California DMV in recent years.)


An editorial in the Victorville Daily Press on January 22 summarized the situation:



According to the [s]ecretary of [s]tate’s website, in order to vote in California one must be at least 18 years old, a United States citizen[,] and a resident of California.


But a court settlement Jan. 10 in response to a suit filed by the League of Women Voters [and several other groups including The National Council of La Raza] may have pushed open the door to rampant voter fraud in this state.  That’s because under the settlement, starting in April the Department of Motor Vehicles will automatically register to vote all those who renew their driver’s licenses unless they opt out.



California Political Review and Courthouse News first broke the story of illegals being allowed to vote starting this spring on January 18 in an article titled “Alert: Starting April 1 California DMV Will AUTOMATICALLY Register Illegal Aliens to Vote – by COURT ORDER”:


The program is part of [A.B.] 1461, dubbed the California New Motor Voter Act.  Signed into law in October 2015, the new statute requires the DMV to forward records for all eligible applicants to the Secretary of State’s Office for registration unless those applicants elect not to register to vote.


As of this writing, WND, claiming an “exclusive,” is the only major publication to have highlighted this development in a brief story on January 21, “California to register illegal aliens to vote – automatically.”


On October 11, 2015, the day after California governor Jerry Brown signed A.B. 1461 into law, the Washington Times, in an article titled “California motor-voter law will flood rolls with noncitizens, critics predict,” indeed predicted what is now coming to pass two and a half years later:


A bill signed Saturday by California [g]ov. Jerry Brown aimed at improving voter turnout has critics predicting that it will ramp up voter fraud by making it easier for noncitizens to cast ballots.


The New Motor Voter Act automatically registers to vote all eligible voters when they obtain or renew their driver’s licenses at the Department of Motor Vehicles instead of requiring them to fill out a form.  Those eligible may opt out of voter registration.


The goal is to ease barriers to voting, but election-integrity advocates warn that the measure could inadvertently add millions of illegal voters to the rolls given that California allows undocumented [i.e., illegal] aliens to obtain driver’s licenses.


The move to legalize non-citizen – including “undocumented” residents’ – voting is slowly spreading nationwide.  In 2016, immigrant activists in New York City endorsed a legislative proposal to allow immigrants residing in the city – legal or not – the right to vote in local elections.  In reporting the story, the New York Post estimated that 500,000 illegal aliens reside in New York City.  This change has not yet been formally approved, however.  Meanwhile, according to Newsweek (September 13, 2017), “Immigrants Are Getting the Right to Vote in Cities Across America.”  The occasion for Newsweek’s article was the decision last year by the Washington, D.C. suburb of College Park, Maryland to allow non-citizens, including illegals, to vote.


Several other cities in Maryland already allow noncitizens to vote locally.  Chicago and San Francisco also offer limited noncitizen voting.  The trend runs counter to the anti-immigration sentiment in many areas of the country, but supporters say residents of cities and towns should have a say in how their government operates, whether they are citizens or not.


The success of left-wing groups supporting the expansion of illegal alien “rights” to include voting has also been reflected in the government shutdown of recent days.  According to an analysis of “this stunning display of political leverage” by illegal alien “DREAMers” by the Washington Times on January 21:


Democrats called it the Trump shutdown.  Republicans labeled it the Schumer shutdown.  But in reality, it was the [DREAM]er shutdown.


The recipe for the current congressional gridlock is complex, but at the top of the list of ingredients are the illegal [alien] [DREAM]ers who pushed Democrats to launch the filibuster that sent the government careening into a partial shutdown.


The political muscle demonstrated by illegals reflected in the national political debate is being increasingly taken note of.  The complementary impact of millions of them potentially voting legally in U.S. elections in the near term is less apparent, but it deserves our serious attention for what it portends.


Peter Barry Chowka is a veteran reporter and analyst of news on national politics, media, and popular culture.  In addition to his writing, Peter has appeared as a guest commentator on NBC; PBS; the CBC; and, on January 4, 2018, the BBC.  For announcements and links to a wide selection of Peter’s published work, follow him on Twitter at @pchowka.










Starting on April 1, 2018, illegal aliens in California who have recently obtained state driver’s licenses legally, or obtained them previously by lying about their immigration status, will automatically be registered to vote.  Since January 2015, according to the California DMV, A.B. 60, a law passed by the California Assembly, “allows illegal immigrants to the United States to apply for a California driver’s license with the CA Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV)” [emphasis original].  As of December 2016, more than 800,000 California driver’s licenses were issued to illegal aliens under the A.B. 60 law. Additional thousands of illegals may have been granted licenses prior to 2015 because they lied on their driver’s license application forms and claimed they were in the country legally.  (No proof of legal residence has been required by the California DMV in recent years.)


An editorial in the Victorville Daily Press on January 22 summarized the situation:


According to the [s]ecretary of [s]tate’s website, in order to vote in California one must be at least 18 years old, a United States citizen[,] and a resident of California.


But a court settlement Jan. 10 in response to a suit filed by the League of Women Voters [and several other groups including The National Council of La Raza] may have pushed open the door to rampant voter fraud in this state.  That’s because under the settlement, starting in April the Department of Motor Vehicles will automatically register to vote all those who renew their driver’s licenses unless they opt out.



California Political Review and Courthouse News first broke the story of illegals being allowed to vote starting this spring on January 18 in an article titled “Alert: Starting April 1 California DMV Will AUTOMATICALLY Register Illegal Aliens to Vote – by COURT ORDER”:


The program is part of [A.B.] 1461, dubbed the California New Motor Voter Act.  Signed into law in October 2015, the new statute requires the DMV to forward records for all eligible applicants to the Secretary of State’s Office for registration unless those applicants elect not to register to vote.


As of this writing, WND, claiming an “exclusive,” is the only major publication to have highlighted this development in a brief story on January 21, “California to register illegal aliens to vote – automatically.”


On October 11, 2015, the day after California governor Jerry Brown signed A.B. 1461 into law, the Washington Times, in an article titled “California motor-voter law will flood rolls with noncitizens, critics predict,” indeed predicted what is now coming to pass two and a half years later:


A bill signed Saturday by California [g]ov. Jerry Brown aimed at improving voter turnout has critics predicting that it will ramp up voter fraud by making it easier for noncitizens to cast ballots.


The New Motor Voter Act automatically registers to vote all eligible voters when they obtain or renew their driver’s licenses at the Department of Motor Vehicles instead of requiring them to fill out a form.  Those eligible may opt out of voter registration.


The goal is to ease barriers to voting, but election-integrity advocates warn that the measure could inadvertently add millions of illegal voters to the rolls given that California allows undocumented [i.e., illegal] aliens to obtain driver’s licenses.


The move to legalize non-citizen – including “undocumented” residents’ – voting is slowly spreading nationwide.  In 2016, immigrant activists in New York City endorsed a legislative proposal to allow immigrants residing in the city – legal or not – the right to vote in local elections.  In reporting the story, the New York Post estimated that 500,000 illegal aliens reside in New York City.  This change has not yet been formally approved, however.  Meanwhile, according to Newsweek (September 13, 2017), “Immigrants Are Getting the Right to Vote in Cities Across America.”  The occasion for Newsweek’s article was the decision last year by the Washington, D.C. suburb of College Park, Maryland to allow non-citizens, including illegals, to vote.


Several other cities in Maryland already allow noncitizens to vote locally.  Chicago and San Francisco also offer limited noncitizen voting.  The trend runs counter to the anti-immigration sentiment in many areas of the country, but supporters say residents of cities and towns should have a say in how their government operates, whether they are citizens or not.


The success of left-wing groups supporting the expansion of illegal alien “rights” to include voting has also been reflected in the government shutdown of recent days.  According to an analysis of “this stunning display of political leverage” by illegal alien “DREAMers” by the Washington Times on January 21:


Democrats called it the Trump shutdown.  Republicans labeled it the Schumer shutdown.  But in reality, it was the [DREAM]er shutdown.


The recipe for the current congressional gridlock is complex, but at the top of the list of ingredients are the illegal [alien] [DREAM]ers who pushed Democrats to launch the filibuster that sent the government careening into a partial shutdown.


The political muscle demonstrated by illegals reflected in the national political debate is being increasingly taken note of.  The complementary impact of millions of them potentially voting legally in U.S. elections in the near term is less apparent, but it deserves our serious attention for what it portends.


Peter Barry Chowka is a veteran reporter and analyst of news on national politics, media, and popular culture.  In addition to his writing, Peter has appeared as a guest commentator on NBC; PBS; the CBC; and, on January 4, 2018, the BBC.  For announcements and links to a wide selection of Peter’s published work, follow him on Twitter at @pchowka.





via American Thinker

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

Posted on

The feds repeatedly manage to lose or intentionally destroy evidence against powerful people the Deep State supports

A computer glitch supposedly destroyed five months of text messages of anti-Trumpers at the FBI.  Sure, it did. 


The Department wants to bring to your attention that the FBI’s technical system for retaining text messages sent and received on FBI mobile devices failed to preserve text messages for Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page[.]



The FBI’s adulterous version of Romeo and Juliet reportedly exchanged 50,000 text messages, apparently documenting every thought that came into their heads as they manipulated the nation’s national security apparatus for political purposes. 


 


What a coincidence!  And not the first time the feds have gotten rid of embarrassing data.  The NSA, too, “accidentally destroyed” evidence. 


The National Security Agency destroyed surveillance data it pledged to preserve in connection with pending lawsuits and apparently never took some of the steps it told a federal court it had taken to make sure the information wasn’t destroyed, according to recent court filings.


Originally reported as a glitch, the State Department said several minutes of tape disappeared.  Does anyone believe that the State Department, which tells us it can analyze everything in the world, somehow can’t figure out who deleted or who ordered the deletion?


The State Department acknowledged Wednesday that someone in its public affairs bureau made a “deliberate” request that several minutes of tape be cut from the video of a 2013 press briefing in which a reporter asked if the administration had lied about secret talks with Iran.


The embarrassing admission by State Department spokesman John Kirby came three weeks after another spokesperson insisted that a “glitch” had caused the gap, discovered only last month by the reporter whose questioning had mysteriously disappeared.


Somehow, IRS computers mysteriously crashed and especially those that were related to targeting of conservative groups.  Does anyone believe that the Justice Department did a serious investigation of the IRS, or was it just a “matter” like Hillary’s emails?


The Internal Revenue Service is missing e-mails from five more employees whose records could shed light on the agency’s targeting scandal, but there are no signs that its personnel have intentionally destroyed evidence, according to an IRS review.


I am sure that only personal emails were wiped from Hillary’s computer.  We can trust her.


One part of the story that remains unknown, CNN’s Brianna Keilar says, is when exactly Clinton wiped her email server clean.


I’m sure nothing destroyed would have been of any interest to investigators or the public. 


“Yes they did, Brooke.” Perez responded.  “As he mentioned, there were 13 mobile devices and 5 iPads that the FBI said that in some way were used with her private email server, and they did in some cases just destroy them with hammers when they were done using them.”


The FBI gave Hillary’s aides a deal when they agreed to destroy the laptops. 


Immunity deals for two top Hillary Clinton aides included a side arrangement obliging the FBI to destroy their laptops after reviewing the devices, House Judiciary Committee sources told Fox News on Monday. 


Sources said the arrangement with former Clinton chief of staff Cheryl Mills and ex-campaign staffer Heather Samuelson also limited the search to no later than Jan. 31, 2015.  This meant investigators could not review documents for the period after the email server became public – in turn preventing the bureau from discovering if there was any evidence of obstruction of justice, sources said. 


Neither the FBI nor any intelligence agency actually analyzed DNC computers, but somehow they are sure the Russians did it. 


Trusting a third party’s report when the DNC hired the third party would be like Al Capone hiring accountants to analyze his tax records and the Justice Department trusting the analysis.


Instead, whether because they were denied access or simply never asked for it, the FBI instead used the analysis of the DNC breach conducted by security firm CrowdStrike as the basis for its investigation.  Regardless of who is telling the truth about what really happened, perhaps the most astonishing thing about this probe is that a private firm’s investigation and attribution was deemed sufficient by both the DNC and the FBI.


Somehow the Justice Department was able to find records that it claimed never existed regarding the “non-planned” meeting between Lynch and Bill Clinton.


After claiming there were no official records related to the infamous summer 2016 meeting between former [p]resident Bill Clinton and Attorney General Loretta Lynch on her private plan[e] in Phoenix, the FBI is now admitting [that] documents do exist and there are dozens of them. 


It has been clear for a long time that the Russian collusion story was essentially made up, that the Russian dossier paid for by the Democrats was a fraud, that the Obama administration illegally spied on Trump and his people, that the Hillary email investigation was always a sham, and that people at the FBI and throughout the Obama administration repeatedly targeted Trump – and the media still show little interest.  Instead, they target Trump every day. 


Will the media care about the new four-page report that probably shows the Obama administration, Hillary Clinton, and the Justice Department colluding to destroy and spy on Trump, or will they try to keep it secret, as Adam Schiff (who says he wants transparency and leaks like a sieve) wants? 


Since the Justice Department essentially cooked the books to allow powerful people to get off if they support it, does anyone think the people at Justice won’t cook the books to get non-connected people or powerful people they don’t support – like Donald Trump? 


Since the government loses and destroys so many records that would hang powerful people, why should we believe that these meddlers won’t destroy documents that would exonerate people they want to hang?


Journalists should stop pretending they believe in equal justice for all, since they are so willing to look the other way for people they support.  I bet they essentially ignore the second Robert Menendez corruption trial as they did the first.


One last point: Why have journalists, Democrats, and the Justice Department never cared who murdered DNC staff member Seth Rich? 


A computer glitch supposedly destroyed five months of text messages of anti-Trumpers at the FBI.  Sure, it did. 


The Department wants to bring to your attention that the FBI’s technical system for retaining text messages sent and received on FBI mobile devices failed to preserve text messages for Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page[.]


The FBI’s adulterous version of Romeo and Juliet reportedly exchanged 50,000 text messages, apparently documenting every thought that came into their heads as they manipulated the nation’s national security apparatus for political purposes. 


 


What a coincidence!  And not the first time the feds have gotten rid of embarrassing data.  The NSA, too, “accidentally destroyed” evidence. 


The National Security Agency destroyed surveillance data it pledged to preserve in connection with pending lawsuits and apparently never took some of the steps it told a federal court it had taken to make sure the information wasn’t destroyed, according to recent court filings.


Originally reported as a glitch, the State Department said several minutes of tape disappeared.  Does anyone believe that the State Department, which tells us it can analyze everything in the world, somehow can’t figure out who deleted or who ordered the deletion?


The State Department acknowledged Wednesday that someone in its public affairs bureau made a “deliberate” request that several minutes of tape be cut from the video of a 2013 press briefing in which a reporter asked if the administration had lied about secret talks with Iran.


The embarrassing admission by State Department spokesman John Kirby came three weeks after another spokesperson insisted that a “glitch” had caused the gap, discovered only last month by the reporter whose questioning had mysteriously disappeared.


Somehow, IRS computers mysteriously crashed and especially those that were related to targeting of conservative groups.  Does anyone believe that the Justice Department did a serious investigation of the IRS, or was it just a “matter” like Hillary’s emails?


The Internal Revenue Service is missing e-mails from five more employees whose records could shed light on the agency’s targeting scandal, but there are no signs that its personnel have intentionally destroyed evidence, according to an IRS review.


I am sure that only personal emails were wiped from Hillary’s computer.  We can trust her.


One part of the story that remains unknown, CNN’s Brianna Keilar says, is when exactly Clinton wiped her email server clean.


I’m sure nothing destroyed would have been of any interest to investigators or the public. 


“Yes they did, Brooke.” Perez responded.  “As he mentioned, there were 13 mobile devices and 5 iPads that the FBI said that in some way were used with her private email server, and they did in some cases just destroy them with hammers when they were done using them.”


The FBI gave Hillary’s aides a deal when they agreed to destroy the laptops. 


Immunity deals for two top Hillary Clinton aides included a side arrangement obliging the FBI to destroy their laptops after reviewing the devices, House Judiciary Committee sources told Fox News on Monday. 


Sources said the arrangement with former Clinton chief of staff Cheryl Mills and ex-campaign staffer Heather Samuelson also limited the search to no later than Jan. 31, 2015.  This meant investigators could not review documents for the period after the email server became public – in turn preventing the bureau from discovering if there was any evidence of obstruction of justice, sources said. 


Neither the FBI nor any intelligence agency actually analyzed DNC computers, but somehow they are sure the Russians did it. 


Trusting a third party’s report when the DNC hired the third party would be like Al Capone hiring accountants to analyze his tax records and the Justice Department trusting the analysis.


Instead, whether because they were denied access or simply never asked for it, the FBI instead used the analysis of the DNC breach conducted by security firm CrowdStrike as the basis for its investigation.  Regardless of who is telling the truth about what really happened, perhaps the most astonishing thing about this probe is that a private firm’s investigation and attribution was deemed sufficient by both the DNC and the FBI.


Somehow the Justice Department was able to find records that it claimed never existed regarding the “non-planned” meeting between Lynch and Bill Clinton.


After claiming there were no official records related to the infamous summer 2016 meeting between former [p]resident Bill Clinton and Attorney General Loretta Lynch on her private plan[e] in Phoenix, the FBI is now admitting [that] documents do exist and there are dozens of them. 


It has been clear for a long time that the Russian collusion story was essentially made up, that the Russian dossier paid for by the Democrats was a fraud, that the Obama administration illegally spied on Trump and his people, that the Hillary email investigation was always a sham, and that people at the FBI and throughout the Obama administration repeatedly targeted Trump – and the media still show little interest.  Instead, they target Trump every day. 


Will the media care about the new four-page report that probably shows the Obama administration, Hillary Clinton, and the Justice Department colluding to destroy and spy on Trump, or will they try to keep it secret, as Adam Schiff (who says he wants transparency and leaks like a sieve) wants? 


Since the Justice Department essentially cooked the books to allow powerful people to get off if they support it, does anyone think the people at Justice won’t cook the books to get non-connected people or powerful people they don’t support – like Donald Trump? 


Since the government loses and destroys so many records that would hang powerful people, why should we believe that these meddlers won’t destroy documents that would exonerate people they want to hang?


Journalists should stop pretending they believe in equal justice for all, since they are so willing to look the other way for people they support.  I bet they essentially ignore the second Robert Menendez corruption trial as they did the first.


One last point: Why have journalists, Democrats, and the Justice Department never cared who murdered DNC staff member Seth Rich? 






via American Thinker Blog

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/

Posted on

Illegal Alien Uber Driver Charged with Four Rapes in Sanctuary State of California

Illegal Alien Uber Driver Charged with Four Rapes in Sanctuary State of California

Illegal alien Alfonso Alarcon-Nunez is suspected of sexually assaulting four women; the district attorney says there could be more.

County of San Luis Obispo via AP

by John Nolte23 Jan 20180



Illegal alien Alfonso Alarcon-Nunez is suspected of sexually assaulting four women; the district attorney says there could be more.

Thirty-nine-year-old Alarcon-Nunez, an Uber driver living in the sanctuary state of California illegally (he is from Mexico), is alleged to have raped four college students between the ages of 19 and 22 while they were intoxicated. The total of ten criminal charges include forcible rape, first degree burglary (he is accused of robbing his victims), and rape of an intoxicated victim.

Alarcon-Nunez was already deported once, from New Mexico back in 2005.

The alleged crimes occurred between December 17, 2017, and January 14 of this year. The suspect, who also goes by the name Bruno Diaz, was arrested at his home in Santa Maria, California on January 17.

According to police, Alarcon-Nunez used his job as an Uber driver to specifically target parties where young, intoxicated women would solicit a ride from him. After the alleged rape, he would steal their money, laptops, jewelry, and phones.

Using a Venemo account and the name “Brush Bat,” he would still get paid for the rides while concealing his identity from his alleged victims.

Apparently Alarcon-Nunez was able to obtain work as an Uber driver due to a California drivers license legally issued to him in 2015.

California grants illegal aliens drivers licenses and, beginning on April 1, will register illegal aliens to vote.

Democrats, who have full control of every governmental institution in California, have been bitterly fighting against the Trump administration’s push to enforce federal immigration laws, even going so far as to threaten to prosecute anyone in California who aids federal authorities in enforcing the law. 

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: http://www.breitbart.com

Posted on

Sessions: We’ll “leave no stone unturned” in finding the Strzok-Page texts

All 50,000 of them? That’s how many texts the FBI apparently “lost” in their retention system during the period of time in which agents Peter Strzok and Lisa Page carried on an extramarital affair — and might have injected partisan bias into the probe of Russian interference in the election. The bureau previously turned over 375 messages to congressional investigators, but when the panels asked for a broader range of messages, the FBI discovered that the messages had been deleted.

Jeff Sessions pledged to “leave no stone unturned” in getting those texts back, while Donald Trump continued to slam the FBI for its performance issues:

The Justice Department’s inspector general is investigating why the FBI did not retain text messages for five months, including those exchanged by two senior officials involved in the probes of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions said late Monday that he has spoken to Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz about the missing text messages and that “a review is already underway to ascertain what occurred” and determine whether the missing text messages can be recovered.

“We will leave no stone unturned to confirm with certainty why these text messages are not now available to be produced and will use every technology available to determine whether the missing messages are recoverable from another source,” Sessions said in a statement.

Sessions also warned of “appropriate legal disciplinary action” if the messages were purposefully deleted. That would be obstruction of justice and tampering with evidence, crimes that the FBI has no hesitancy in establishing when interrogating suspects and material witnesses in their own investigations. Usually, these kinds of systemic issues are created by incompetence, but this seems awfully coincidental and at the same time unusually beneficial to both the FBI and the two agents. It still may well be an unrelated systems management issue, but the bureau will bear a heavy burden in convincing people if that’s their conclusion.

House Republicans Trey Gowdy and John Ratcliffe aren’t biting on the “coincidence” theory. They want to know more about Strzok’s “secret society” comment in the text messages that they do have:

Reps. Trey Gowdy and John Ratcliffe join FNC’s Martha McCallum to talk about another newly released text message between FBI agents Peter Strzok and Lisa Page. This time, Strzok implies a “secret society” of federal agents worked to prevent Donald Trump from becoming president.

“It is possible these text messages that are missing, perhaps they really were lost. Perhaps it is another strange coincidence,” Ratcliffe said. “It is harder and harder for us to explain one strange coincidence after another.”

“We know that Strzok and Page had an intense anti-Trump bias,” he said. “And that’s OK, so long as they check it at the door and do their job. We learned today in the thousands of text messages we have reviewed, that perhaps they may not have done that. We know about this ‘insurance policy’ that was referenced trying to prevent Donald Trump from becoming president.”

Ratcliffe continued: “We learned today about information that in the immediate aftermath of his election, there may have been a ‘secret society’ of folks within the Department of Justice and the FBI, to include Page and Strzok, working against him. I’m not saying that actually happened, but when folks speak in those terms, they need to come forward to explain the context.”

About the “secret society,” Gowdy said: “You have this insurance policy in Spring 2016, and then the day after the election, what they really didn’t want to have happen, there is a text exchange between these two FBI agents, these supposed to be fact-centric FBI agents saying, ‘Perhaps this is the first meeting of the secret society.’ So I’m going to want to know what secret society you are talking about, because you’re supposed to be investigating objectively the person who just won the electoral college. So yeah — I’m going to want to know.”

How tough will it be to find these messages? The FBI claims that the Samsung 5 had an issue with retention on the devices themselves, but the transmission of those messages would create more records to find. If the texts got sent over commercial cellular phone networks, one would think it would be fairly easy to restore them. Thanks to the PATRIOT Act and other regulatory issues, cellular companies have kept lengthy archives of both call and text records. Law enforcement routinely works with cellular companies to retrieve messages that have been deleted off of phones either used during or incidental to crimes; this should be no different.

If they can’t retrieve the messages, what then? For one, it will cast a long shadow over the FBI’s work during the summer of 2016 and their motives in seeking the FISA warrant that began the Russia-collusion hypothesis. Thanks to the texts already seen from Strzok and Page, the appearance of partisanship has already been established, so a failure to produce the rest of their messages will at the very least look like a cover-up, even if it isn’t. Second, it might force Congress to yank Robert Mueller’s chain and demand to see what he’s discovered about the Strzok-Page element in the case.

Third and most critically, the suspicion that the FBI destroyed evidence might make it impossible for Mueller to seek criminal convictions with any evidence connected to that FISA warrant, no matter how indirectly the charges are tied to it. It’s the kind of misconduct that ends prosecutions, and Mueller understands that well enough. Any criminal defense attorney would seize on that fact alone to undermine the FBI’s investigation (and by extension Mueller’s) as hopelessly corrupt — and at the moment, that’s not an unreasonable conclusion.

The post Sessions: We’ll “leave no stone unturned” in finding the Strzok-Page texts appeared first on Hot Air.

via Hot Air

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

Posted on

Gowdy on Strzok Texts: ‘That Is a Level of Bias That Is Stunning Among Law Enforcement Officers’

Tuesday on Fox News Channel’s “America’s Newsroom,” while discussing texts message between FBI agents Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R.-S.C.) said they had “a level of bias that is stunning among law enforcement officers.”

Partial transcript as follows:

SMITH: What do we need to know at this point

GOWDY: We need to know a couple of things. Number one we need to know how the worlds premier law enforcement agency managed to lose five months worth of texts. And what is also troubling in the text we do have they’re discussing how to avoid texts being captured and secured. So what is missing is important but also what is there is important. It is manifest bias not just against Trump, but against his kids, against his business interests. There is a text where they hope the Trump Hotel fails. That is a level of bias that you rarely see and you never see from law enforcement officers. What is also troubling to me is this text that Johnny Ratcliffe found last night about this secret society. Now, I have no clue what that means because it was not the phraseology I used. But it’s the day after the election and it’s the same two people that were discussing a little bit later in the text the damage they had done with the Clinton investigation and how they could, quote, fix it and make it right. That is a level of bias that is stunning among law enforcement officers.

SMITH: Congressman Ron Johnson—you had a chance to see and hear what just came out of this radio interview with a local radio station, he read off one of the text messages that he says that he has uncovered between the two FBI agents and we don’t have an exact verbatim but we know what he read off. That is Strzok typing you and I both the odds are nothing. If i thought it likely I would be there no question. I hesitate in part because my gut concern is there is no big there there. What does that tell you?

GOWDY: That tells me two things. Number one — it actually tells me three things. First kudos to Johnson for getting this information. Secondarily, it tells me that one of the lead counter intelligence agents in the country doesn’t think there is anything there there. What disappoints me the most he has no interest in participating in an investigation that might clear Donald Trump. His only interest is if there is quote something there so he can then fix what he did with the Hillary Clinton email investigation. I don’t know a cop that is not equally interested in clearing the innocent as they are getting the bad guys. So for him to only be interested, if there is quote something there where he can get the president, is agent to admit.

SMITH: Can you weigh in on the timing that the tweet Ron Johnson read off? The text is from May 19, 2017, two days, congressman, after Robert Mueller was appointed special counsel.

GOWDY: It’s not good and it is also in that same time period where we’re missing five months worth of texts. So god only knows what else was said. That’s a really important time period. Sessions has recused himself, Bob Mueller is coming on board. I happen to like him. I respect him. I think he is going to do a good job. But if he is picking guys like Peter Strzok and Lisa Page to be on his team and they are only interested in being on the team if they can get the president, they have no interest in clearing him, then he had some hiring failures of epic proportion.

(h/t Grabien)

Follow Pam Key on Twitter @pamkeyNEN

via Breitbart News

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

Posted on

The public isn’t as fond of boundless immigration as the Democrats are betting they are

The Democrats are still picking up the pieces from Chuck Schumer’s realization that maybe shutting down the government wasn’t such a hot idea, and their supporters in the media are figuring out who to blame. The Washington Post offers a host of possibilities today, ranging from Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnel (naturally) to the Democratic leadership for “losing their nerve.” One wag went so far as to suggest blaming Barack Obama. But under the covers and behind the cloakroom doors, it sounds more like a dose of cold, hard reality was setting in for Schumer.

It had become obvious that the public was catching on to the fact that the shutdown was essentially about DACA. The Democrats wanted to demand their “clean” DACA bill and were willing to shut down the government to get it. But we’ve already heard rumors that their own internal polling was showing the voters souring on that angle in a serious way, probably leading to the Minority Leader’s change of heart. If so, his conclusion is definitely supported by some recent polling which shows that a serious majority of Americans, while they have sympathy for the Dreamers, overall don’t want to see even legal immigration increasing. In fact, they’d like to see less of it. (Free Beacon)

Eighty-one percent of Americans want one million or fewer legal immigrants to the United States per year, according to new polling data released Monday by the Harvard-Harris poll, a number lower than the 1.38 million who came to the United States in 2015.

The plurality of respondents, 35 percent, think that there should be between 1 and 250,000 legal immigrants arriving to the United States per year. A net 12 percent want to see immigration increased to 1.5 million people per year or more, while nine percent of Americans think that there should be no new legal immigrants.

Plurality preference for between 1 and 250,000 new immigrants a year persists across white, Hispanic, and black Americans, as well as moderates and self-identified Democrats. Such a rate of immigration would be lower even than the rate expected from the RAISE Act, a bill backed by the administration and expected to cut immigration in half in ten years.

That new Harvard-Harris poll is available here, and the numbers are stunning. The basic question has nothing to do with illegal immigrants (who the Democrats also champion), but rather those immigrating legally. More than three quarters of the public wants to see the numbers lower than they currently are. The only solid plurality in the poll, in terms of precisely how many immigrants they feel we need to accept each year, wants the number to be less than 250,000 (which is more than a million less than what we’re currently taking in). The tally of people who actually want more immigration – and this is the group the Democrats are basing their electoral hopes on – only adds up to 12%. And that number is only three points higher than that of people who don’t want any more immigration at all.

Chuck Schumer may have some political opinions I don’t agree with (and he’s one of my senators, just for the record), but the man isn’t stupid. He can read a poll as well as the next person. Do you really think that didn’t factor into his decision to back off on the shutdown after it became obvious to one and all that this mess was all about DACA?

One other thing I’m sure Schumer is pondering this week is how this affects the #RESIST movement and their prospects against Trump. We’re once again seeing a situation where a lot of voters may not care for President Donald Trump, but they really do like some of the policies of President Donald Trump. Majorities approve of the wall (even if they’re not sure if they want to pay for it) and most of his other takes on questions of immigration and border security. They like that he’s standing up for the police and veterans. And boy do they like a good tax cut. It should be noted that each of those items are things which the Democrats have been fighting against.

How much longer can that disconnect continue? If you like the majority of the President’s policies, doesn’t it eventually become hard to dislike the guy pushing them, even if you find his tweeting and propensity for political food fights to be offputting? And perhaps more to the point, how much longer can the Democrats maintain their favorable numbers if they are fighting against policies the public supports based solely on the fact that these are things Trump wants? None of this adds up and it just feels like something has to give in the approval ratings game sooner or later.

The post The public isn’t as fond of boundless immigration as the Democrats are betting they are appeared first on Hot Air.

via Hot Air

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

Posted on

GOP Lawmaker: Future of This Country at Risk by Contents of Classified FISA Memo (Video) #ReleaseTheMemo

GOP Lawmaker: Future of This Country at Risk by Contents of Classified FISA Memo (Video) #ReleaseTheMemo

January 19, 2018
by Jim Hoft

On Thursday a classified DOJ memo on the FISA abuse by top officials rocked Washington DC–

 The House Intel panel’s passage of New York Republican Rep. Peter King’s motion to release the FISA abuse memo to fellow House members has rocked Washington, D.C.

Lawmakers from Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) to Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-NY) have called for the classified memo’s immediate release.

According to Fox News contributor Sara Carter, the contents of the memo are so “explosive,”that it could end special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia probe once and for all.

Rep. Matt Gaetz later told Sean Hannity, “I believe people will go to jail.” 

On Friday afternoon Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-OH) joined the chorus calling on government to release the FISA memo.

Wenstrup used a quote by Abraham Lincoln to stress the significance of this document.

Brad Wenstrup: I think that we are, I’ll use Abraham Lincoln’s line, “We’re testing whether this nation or any nation so conceived can long endure.” If we don’t correct our wrongs, we the people don’t have oversight and the people don’t get to have oversight with us as members of Congress then that’s a problem.

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

via The Gateway Pundit

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

Posted on

Pictures: Globalist Davos Summit Buried in Snow as Elites Gather to Discuss Global Warming

Pictures: Globalist Davos Summit Buried in Snow as Elites Gather to Discuss Global Warming

Getty Images

by Oliver JJ Lane23 Jan 20180



The annual meeting of globalist elites at the Swiss ski resort Davos got off to an unintentionally ironic start this week as delegates including 60 heads of state and hundreds of top business leaders found themselves severely delayed by snow storms.

Not even the favoured elite means of transport to avoid traffic problems that beset ordinary people was available as the World Economic Forum summit opened, as the severe snow storm closed even the town’s helicopter pads.

The New York Times reports speakers were late to their own sessions and press conferences in Davos Monday as the roads had become impassable and clogged with traffic — even including the “luxury” black minivans brought to the town to ferry top Davos guests quickly and anonymously.

A soldier stands guard with rifle ready as he protects the delegates to the World Economic Forum’s Davos summit Monday / Getty Images

Roads became gridlocked and difficult to navigate as huge amounts of snow landed on Davos / AP Images

One who missed their speech because of the snow was academic Linda P. Fried, who “bristled” at the suggestion that a summit that was to devote a large part of its time to discussing global warming was being severely affected by snow, telling the NYT that “It isn’t accurate, people just don’t understand, that’s not the metric.”

Although Davos is known as a meeting place of keen globalists championing progressive causes, it is also anticipated that the key herald of anti-globalism is to attend this week and speak Friday — President Donald J. Trump. The anti-Globalist President is expected to close Davos Friday, giving a speech that is anticipated to touch his electoral keystones of economic protectionism and America First doctrine — themes that the rest of the summit attendees are expected to spend their week working against.

Swiss police officers walk the snow / AP Images

Delegates and speakers were delayed by the weather / Getty Images

Despite that, Britain’s left-wing globalist Guardian newspaper reports that proceedings Tuesday kicked off with positive words spoken about President Trump at Davos by Nariman Behravesh, chief economist at IHS Markit, who told the assembled delegates before the opening speech by India’s President Modi that business confidence has increased because of Trump, and that corporate America had not liked President Obama as much.

The mayor of Davos said he hoped the snow would slow on Tuesday / AP Images

Noting that the United States is now at a state of full employment, Behravesh remarked of Trump: “Business finally got a president it thought was business friendly and the reduction in regulation has been received well”, but warned against the global economy overheating.

Follow Oliver Lane on Facebook, Twitter: or e-mail: olane[at]breitbart.com

via Breitbart News

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