Snopes isn’t truthful?
Is this is my shocked face.
Let’s look at this thing realistically. First of all they never planned on charging Jussie Smollett.
Secondly, who is it that would benefit from these charges being dropped just now?
Think of it this way. We just got through going through a weekend where the largest scandal in American history has just been revealed. Can you possibly imagine a better time to drop the charges against Smollett than now to take the heat off of those responsible for that huge scandal?
And who would want to do that?
This is who.
But Kim Foxx has also found two other sources of cash, in the form of twin $300,000 donations to a Super PAC supporting her called Illinois Safety & Justice. The sole donors to the PAC are neoliberal superdonor and conservative-boogeyman George Soros and a “dark-money” group called Civic Participation Action Fund. A Super PAC is a fundraising group, created by the 2010 Supreme Court Citizens United decision, that can raise as much money as they want for any candidate or cause—as long as they don’t coordinate on any level with political campaigns, which have much smaller campaign limits.
Seems to me and even money bet that Mr. Soros pulled a couple of strings to get this done. After all, Kim Foxx owes him. Or perhaps it’s fair to say he owns her.
File this one under “the connectedness of things”.
The Wall Street Journal reported on Monday that the alleged co-conspirator in the alleged Michael Avenatti fraud scheme is CNN legal analyst Mark Geragos, who is also Jussie Smollett’s lawyer.
The Trump campaign has sent a letter to the networks asking for a high standard, actual journalism, from Legal Insurrection
After Russiagate came crashing down, Trump’s re-election campaign is targeting six high profile Democrats who, they claim, “made outlandish, false claims, without evidence.”
Six Democrats were mentioned in a memo sent by the re-election campaign to networks: Sen. Richard Blumenthal, Rep. Jerry Nadler, Rep. Adam Schiff, Rep. Eric Swalwell, DNC Chair Tom Perez, and John Brennan, former CIA director.
These clowns have been making false claims about their duly elected President for two years. If the can not or will not distinguish between fact and their personal desires. they ought just shut-up and go home.
So, with this, the pattern is now well-established.
Consider the parallels to Hillary Clinton, and the people behind the hoax of the last two years.
The crimes of those who are overtly left wing get ignored by the criminal justice system.
Imagine a white guy in Chicago, claiming that he was beat up by a bunch of black thugs. Now, imagine that evidence came to light that the whole thing was faked. They’d call him a racist, they call him every name in the book and they would charge him.
Now I’m hatching it was decided that the white guy faking such an attack wouldn’t be charged. Does anybody seriously consider that there wouldn’t be rioting right now?
How loudly do we have to scream, anymore, to obtain Justice?
Addendum:(Eric)
On the other hand, if you wanted to divert The public’s attention from the scandal of the last two years of lies coming out of the mainstream press, causing this to happen right now would seem to be a good way of doing it… Would any of you be surprised to learn that was precisely the idea?
This is too rich to leave alone.
That creepy porn lawyer
For those who don’t remember who Michael Avenatti is, he was the lawyer for Stormy Daniels, a very loud anti Trumper, and was seriously being touted as a Democrat presidential candidate to run against Trump in 2020.
His most endearing quality to his supporters in the Democrat Party? He doesn’t like Trump. Apparently, that’s all it takes anymore.
So anyway, today it drops that avenatti has been charged in a 20 million dollar fraud scheme.
NEW YORK (Reuters) – Michael Avenatti, the lawyer who represented adult film star Stormy Daniels in her legal battles with U.S. President Donald Trump, was charged Monday with extortion in what a federal prosecutor called an attempt to “shake down” Nike Inc for over $20 million.
Avenatti, who was also hit with separate federal charges of embezzlement and fraud in California, was arrested in New York and was scheduled to make his initial court appearance later in the day, authorities said.
Somehow, I suspect that Avenatti will not be running for president.
It would appear that they have begun to notice the lynch mobs coming over the hill. And who is first to notice? Piers Morgan.
Yeah, I wouldn’t have expected that one, either.
And he issues the op-ed, not in the American Press, and certainly not on air at CNN, but in London’s Daily mail. (Gee, I can’t imagine why…)
The entire two-year Russia collusion frenzy was based on an absolute falsehood that Donald Trump and his team had colluded with Russians to fix the 2016 election.
It’s hard to imagine a worse thing to say about someone than that they betrayed their country, that they were traitors to their own people.
Yet that was the charge levelled at Trump in an obsessively unrelenting campaign to bring him down as President.
Today, he stands completely vindicated.
It’s worth a read only for the entertainment value. One reads this tome, amazed that Morgan isn’t choking on his own tongue for even attempting to say these things.
I am encouraged to find Morgan with such a grip on reality, albeit newfound. Encouraged, because I can’t help but Wonder how many others will be influenced by his discovery of the wonderful concept of reality.
Adam Schiff may be in some serious trouble.
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., said Monday that Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., should step down as chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.
Minority leader Kevin McCarthy
McCarthy said Schiff used his high-profile role as leader of the committee to push a false narrative about President Trump and insinuate to the American public that Trump colluded with Russia.
“I am calling on him to leave the committee as chairman,” McCarthy said during an interview on Fox News Monday. “He should apologize to the American public, and he should step back from being chair of the intel committee.”
This seems to be pretty much of a slam dunk, in terms of evidence. After all he’s been claiming for almost 3 years now that there has been and is solid irrefutable evidence of collusion with the Russians by the Trump White House. Not only has he failed to produce such proof, but every bit of evidence put forward by the Mueller investigation that just a short time ago the Democrats were praising, there is no evidence whatsoever.
I agree with McCarthy. Adam Schiff needs to be gone.
No word if he ever paid off. Does anybody think he will?
Glenn Reynolds makes an excellent point this morning at Useless Toady, in a column that I can’t imagine they weren’t loathe to print:
The irony, of course, is that while purporting to worry about Russian interference in American politics, by advancing this story the press was actually doing Putin’s work, sowing division and confusion through the American polity. As former Clinton pollster Mark Penn tweeted, we wasted two years, thirty million dollars, and a lot of institutional credibility at the FBI and Department of Justice over ‘a false story of Russia collusion based on oppo research that was always unsubstantiated and preposterous.’
And and why were they going out on that limb? To save Hillary Clinton’s face.
Actually, it was always a crock, dreamed up immediately after Hillary Clinton’s election-night defeat by her staff to explain away failure. As reported in the campaign book “Shattered,” by Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes, Clinton refused to take responsibility for her defeat, and the day after her concession, top officials gathered “to engineer the case that the election wasn’t entirely on the up-and-up.… Already, Russian hacking was the centerpiece of the argument.”
Though this was a matter of record — the book was hardly obscure — the news media chose to run with the Russia story, which quickly morphed from “hacking” to the more nebulous “collusion,” quite credulously. They did so because they wanted it to be true, because they hoped it would hurt Trump, whom the press almost universally despises, and because it was good for ratings and clicks.
I’m not sure I buy that last part. The fact of the matter is, outside of people trapped in airports waiting for planes, CNN doesn’t have any viewers other than the extreme far left …and there just isn’t that many of them. If CNN actually gave a damn about ratings, they’d be handling things a little bit differently, don’t you think?
The real issue here was, is, and always shall be, supporting the Democrat Party line and in this case that means Hillary Rodham vonPantsuit. That’s the Hill, (pardon the pun), that the credibility of MSNBC, CNN, The New York Times, The Washington Post, Etc., all died on.
It is as Rick Moran suggested yesterday…
Over at The Federalist, Jason Beale agrees, saying in part:
We will hear a lot about the accessibility of the information in the Mueller report. Will we all be able to read enough of it to be comfortable with the prosecutorial decisions made, and the underlying investigatory details that informed those decisions?
Everyone asking that question knows the answer is “Yes,” yet they’ll keep asking because they need a grievance to supplant, and deflect attention from, the failure of the treason narrative.
The idea is to demand a level of access and transparency that is impossible to attain — since here will always be limitations on the release of classified sources and methods, or legitimately privileged information — then create a hypothetical scenario wherein the redaction or withholding of such material is an injustice worthy of protest and suspicion.
Which in turn, is precisely why I called yesterday for a complete release of the documents involved without any redaction whatsoever.
There may be legal issues to overcome to facilitate such a release, but those can be overcome by executive order in a heartbeat. The president would do well to consider it.
But, as is suggested in all these articles I’m quoting, don’t expect any Mia culpa out of the mainstream media at any point in the near future.
One really must wonder however, what form retribution from the public will take… Against both the press and the Democrats.
And here’s a parting thought;
How screwed are we, when the Press and the Democrats are so desperate to prove the president is a criminal, with no evidence?
The Drudge homepage tells the story:
It’s all out there now, and the reactions from the Democrats are by and large a pitiful combination of the following images…
Marvin the Martian ( Where was the kaboom? There was supposed to be an earth-shattering kaboom!!)
# The Black Knight from Monty Python’s holy Grail…( “The Black Knight always triumphs!!! Have at you! I’ll bite your legs off!”)
# Captain Ahab… (All that most maddens and torments; all that stirs up the lees of things; all truth with malice in it; all that cracks the sinews and cakes the brain; all the subtle demonisms of life and thought; all evil, to crazy Ahab, were visibly personified, and made practically assailable in Moby-Dick. He piled upon the whale’s white hump the sum of all the general rage and hate felt by his whole race from Adam down; and then, as if his chest had been a mortar, he burst his hot heart’s shell upon it.)
A number of the Democrats are still screaming for the full report to be publicly distributed, and while there are some legal ramifications of this, frankly I’m inclined to agree as I said earlier today. I am convinced that such release would be more damaging to the Democrats than they can possibly imagine and would end up being their worst nightmare.
Interesting, that Glenn Greenwald continues to astonish:
Like I said, pitiful.
Am I celebrating? No, not really. I suppose I would be, if I thought for a split second that the Democrats were going to back off, but they are far too heavily invested in this hoax to let it go now.
All one can say is good luck with that. Just remember, Ahab died, and the whale didn’t.
Excellent podcast as always, guys. I do listen every week, and enjoy it every time.
I will take a small exception to the last couple of minutes of this week’s podcast, where you got into discussions about John McCain.
Please don’t misunderstand me here, your read of the man and mine are very much parallel, as you will probably see by reading my post early Sunday morning …written before I heard your podcast, since I usually don’t get it until Sunday night, or sometimes Monday.
With that said, I think your collective reading of why Donald Trump went after John McCain within the last week is a little off base. I think in this case there’s a great deal to be had by attacking a dead guy.
I think the only way that I can really explain what I’m thinking, is to cite a historical example.
The Nelson Rockefeller wing of the Republican party did not simply disappear when Nelson Rockefeller himself assumed room temperature.
Rockefeller was in fact, the ideological foundation for a large percentage of the GOP, and I think that’s damage that the GOP has yet to recover from, really.
In much the same way, there is a large contingent people who call themselves Republican who are ideological mates of John McCain. There, too, is a great deal of damage there, from which the party will have a long, painful healing process.
I submit that by attacking the ideological base of that wing of the party … McCain, Trump is attacking his followers, albeit indirectly…. Trying to bring that wing of the party to heel. That’s something that certainly needs to be done, if we’re going to see anything out of Capitol Hill for the next two years.
You might put such cleverness, such intimate psychological understanding of his opponents past Trump, but I’m not sure that I do anymore. Based on what we’ve seen in the last two years, I suggest that very few people will go broke overestimating the man.
We know the Democrats are gearing up to claim that any redaction from the Mueller reports is hiding something from the Democrats who are bloodthirsty about Trump.
Moreover, let’s say that the Democrats get their stated wish in terms of being able to view the Mueller report unedited.
Does anybody really think that that report isn’t going to be made public before the echo dies?
So in reality, any concern about security gets blown out the window the second the Democrats get their hands on it regardless of how it’s classified.
We might as well have the report without any redaction at all so the Democrats can’t make that claim.
Indeed, if the report comes out in total with no redaction whatsoever, it appears to me that this would be the Democrats worst nightmare.
Remember that I was as I have often said, actually providing a solution to a problem is the worst thing you can do to a Democrat because it removes their capability of demagoguing the situation.
In this case, if the total report comes out with no black lines through it, the Democrats will never be able to complain that things were covered up.
The action would drive a stake of Holly through the heart of the Democrats favorite conspiracy theory. Besides, it’ll make Rachel Maddow cry again.
Do it now.
Yeah, I know… Snopes claims he wasn’t, as do the remainder of the leftist-run “Fact checking” sites.
Well, before you start tossing me links from that garbage, I should tell you that I trust them about as far as I can throw Michael Moore, in general and on this point, even less.
Here are the facts.
Upon McCain’s return from Vietnam, his records as a POW were immediately marked classified. His commanding officer while he was a POW, Colonel Ted Guy, submitted a series of charges to military prosecutors that cited McCain with treason among other things. McCain, along with 33 other POW’s, faced court martial with McCain by far being the one accused of the most serious of crimes. But it was also McCain, who was the son and grandson of distinguished Navy Admirals, that had to be protected at all costs for the sake of his family’s distinguished reputation. Because of this, the worst traitor in American history became known as a war hero and was elected to the Senate. President Richard Nixon issued a blanket pardon for McCain and the other 33 POW’s.
Don’t any McCain supporters wonder why Russia has never opened it’s files on McCain? Files, I should point out, that contain the 32 propaganda broadcasts McCain made from Hanoi. And let’s remember the relationship he carried on with the Russians… In many cases, the very same people named as people of interest in the Russia gate hoax.
So, then why the massive cover-up from these left- wing press run sites?
That’s an easy one.
McCain was always the “go to” guy for the leftist press. Any time they wanted a “credible” mouthpiece to oppose conservatives, McCain was always the one that they dredged up. And never one to be shy about showboating, McCain was always willing… no… eager to oblige.
McCain, you see, was the ticket to credibility for the left wing press, and reliable bad actor for the left. Someone willing to lie for the left especially if he was paid for it.
Nobody would dare question a POW/war hero. It’s in their interest to perpetrate the myth of McCain.
As an example…. Remember, gang that among the other smears against those to his right was the charge that Trump was helping ISIS... A laughable charge, particularly given Trump’s recent actions in Syria. For that charge to have any weight at all, Trump would have had to execute a U-turn tight enough that no mere human could withstand the G-forces.
Trump happens to be right about McCain, but this isn’t about Trump. Remember, Trump was never my guy. However, as I have said often…
Problem solutions require proper problem identification.
This is about correctly labeling the damage done by a traitor.
Paul Sperry at the New York Post, with a reminder:
Bitter to the core, she and her campaign aides hatched a scheme, just 24 hours after conceding the race, to spoon-feed the dirty rumors to an eager liberal media and manufacture the narrative that Russia secretly colluded with her neophyte foe to sabotage her coronation
“Within 24 hours of her concession speech, [campaign chair John Podesta and manager Robby Mook] assembled her communications team at the Brooklyn headquarters to engineer the case that the election wasn’t entirely on the up-and-up. For a couple of hours, with Shake Shack containers littering the room, they went over the script they would pitch to the press and the public. Already, Russian hacking was the centerpiece of the argument.”
The plan, according to the book, was to push journalists to cover how “Russian hacking was the major unreported story of the campaign,” and it succeeded to a fare-thee-well. After the election, coverage of the Russian “collusion” story was relentless, and it helped pressure investigations and hearings on Capitol Hill and even the naming of a special counsel, which in turn has triggered virtually nonstop coverage.
