-------------------------------------------
HAPPENING NOW: ABC Just Canceled Roseanne's Reboot Show - Duration: 5:50.
HAPPENING NOW: ABC Just Canceled Roseanne's Reboot Show,
ABC has just canceled the hit 'Roseanne' reboot show, after Roseanne Barr tweeted out
an attack on former Obama top aide Valerie Jarrett.
From CNN
ABC canceled its hit sitcom "Roseanne" on Tuesday after the show's biggest star,
Roseanne Barr, went on a racist Twitter rant.
"Roseanne's Twitter statement is abhorrent, repugnant and inconsistent with our values,
and we have decided to cancel her show," ABC said.
The cancellation comes just months after the show premiered to huge ratings.
Barr had earlier apologized and said she was "now leaving Twitter."
Following Barr's Twitter rant, one of the show's consulting producers, Wanda Sykes,
said she's done with the show.
"I will not be returning to @RoseanneOnABC," Sykes tweeted.
And Sara Gilbert, who plays Barr's daughter on the ABC sitcom, tweeted that Barr's comments
are "abhorrent and do not reflect the beliefs of our cast and crew or anyone associated
with our show."
Gilbert added: "This is incredibly sad and difficult for all of us, as we've created
a show that we believe in, are proud of, and that audiences love — one that is separate
and apart from the opinions and words of one cast member."
Barr is notorious for tweeting about pro-Trump conspiracy theories and other controversial
topics.
This week she repeatedly attacked prominent Democrats.
In one of the tweets, she wrote, "Muslim brotherhood & planet of the apes had a baby=vj."
Barr was responding to a comment about Valerie Jarrett, a top former aide to President Obama.
She replied to CNN reporter Andrew Kaczynski and said it was "a joke."
But Barr later deleted the tweet and tweeted an apology to Jarrett and "all Americans."
"I am truly sorry for making a bad joke about her politics and her looks," Barr
tweeted.
"I should have known better.
Forgive me — my joke was in bad taste."
Barr then said she's leaving Twitter.
Jarrett declined to comment.
Social media lit up with criticism of both Barr and ABC, with some demanding a response
from the broadcast network.
ABC has not replied to CNNMoney's request for comment.
I apologize to Valerie Jarrett and to all Americans.
I am truly sorry for making a bad joke about her politics and her looks.
I should have known better.
Forgive me-my joke was in bad taste.
In the past, ABC executives have privately said that they hold their noses when Barr
tweets.
They know some of her posts have been problematic — full of pro-Trump conspiracy theories
that mislead her fans.
The executives want Barr to focus on her show.
But they seem to take the position that there's no controlling Barr, and that's what makes
her the successful comic she is.
ABC employees shared these views on condition of anonymity earlier this year, before the
current Twitter controversy.
Barr also made comments on Twitter about Chelsea Clinton, tweeting, "Chelsea Soros Clinton."
She later replied in the comments that Clinton is "married to Soros nephew."
Soros is a billionaire liberal benefactor who has been the subject to many right-wing
conspiracy theories over the years.
Chelsea Soros Clinton Clinton responded to Barr shortly after.
"Good morning Roseanne – my given middle name is Victoria.
I imagine George Soros's nephews are lovely people.
I'm just not married to one," she wrote.
Barr responded back to Clinton saying, "Sorry to have tweeted incorrect info about you!
Please forgive me!"
Good morning Roseanne – my given middle name is Victoria.
I imagine George Soros's nephews are lovely people.
I'm just not married to one.
I am grateful for the important work @OpenSociety does in the world.
Have a great day!
She then continued, "By the way, George Soros is a nazi who turned in his fellow Jews
2 be murdered in German concentration camps & stole their wealth-were you aware of that?
But, we all make mistakes, right Chelsea?"
This is a conspiracy theory about Soros that has been debunked many times.
The fact-checking site Snopes called it "false" back in 2016.
Barr's followers are accustomed to her conspiratorial tweets, but even by her standards, Tuesday
was outrageous.
Some commenters connected her behavior to Trump-era intolerance and said ABC was helping
to normalize racism by supporting her show.
MSNBC's "Morning Joe" host Joe Scarborough was critical of ABC on Twitter.
"Hey @ABC, Roseanne Barr compared Valerie Jarrett to an ape.
There is no apology she can make that justifies @ABC turning a blind eye to this bigotry by
airing another second of her show," he tweeted.
"Even in the Age of Trump, there are red lines that can never be crossed.
This is one."
.@ABC, how desperate are you to profit from Roseanne's racism?
We know racism sells in this country, it always has.
But you don't have to participate in it.
This apology is meaningless.
Cancel Roseanne.
The premiere of Roseanne's reboot was one of the highest-rated new shows of the season,
and Barr is one of the network's biggest stars, if not its biggest.
However, after the huge debut, which brought in more than 18 million live viewers, the
show saw its audience come back down to earth.
Its finale, which aired last week, nabbed roughly 10 million viewers.
what do you think about this?
Please Share this news and Scroll down to comment below and don't forget to subscribe
USA facts today.
-------------------------------------------
Avenatti slows Cohen investigation: report - Duration: 3:13.
Avenatti slows Cohen investigation: report
Stormy Daniels attorney Michael Avenatti has pumped the brakes on prosecutors efforts to investigate a hush-money payment from President Trumps personal attorney Michael Cohen.
The Wall Street Journal reported that Avenatti has slowed prosecutors attempts to speak with Daniels former attorney about the hush-money deal, and also requested to review records subpoenaed from the adult-film stars former manager.
The investigation into Cohen centers around possible campaign finance violations and bank fraud stemming from a $130,000 payment to Daniels in 2016, just weeks before the presidential election.
Daniels alleges that she had an affair with Trump in 2006.
The payment - and a related nondisclosure agreement -was intended to prevent Daniels from speaking publicly about the alleged affair.
Trump has denied that he ever had a sexual relationship with Daniels.
The Wall Street Journal reported that Avenatti has not yet acted on prosecutors requests for Daniels to waive attorney-client privilege so that investigators can speak with her former lawyer Keith Davidson.
Avenatti also sent a cease-and-desist letter to Davidson in April demanding that he not release any records related to Daniels, one source told the Wall Street Journal.
Avenatti also tried to prevent Daniels former manager Gina Rodriguez from turning over communications to prosecutors until he reviewed them, the Wall Street Journal reported.
The reported moves by Avenatti have frustrated prosecutors, although they are not seen as damaging or discrediting to the probe.
Avenatti insisted that he and his client have cooperated fully with federal investigators, and that any claim otherwise is false.
We have already started producing documents to the government so any suggestion we are not cooperating is meritless, he told the Wall Street Journal.
He also said that he had told Davidson to stop communicating about Daniels, because Avenatti believed he was conspiring behind her back with Mr Cohen..
-------------------------------------------
Democrats' California conundrum could cost them the House - Duration: 11:02.
Democrats' California conundrum could cost them the House
Few Democrats anywhere present themselves as more inveterate opponents of Donald Trump than California Lt.
Gov.
Gavin Newsom, the clear front-runner for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination in next weeks primary.
And yet few Democrats anywhere are facing more pointed accusations than Newsom of pursuing a strategy that could help Trump achieve his highest political goal in 2018: maintaining Republican control of the US House.
The charge against Newsom, which his camp forcefully rejects, undercores how profoundly the dynamics of Californias unusual top-two primary system distort the typical calculations for candidates and the two major parties.
One week before the June 5 vote, California Republicans face the near-certainty of failing to advance a candidate to the general election for US Senate, and the risk, though fading, of failing to place a candidate on the November ballot for Governor.
Democrats, meanwhile, are terrified that they will be shut out next week in one or more Republican-held US House districts, particularly in suburban Orange County.
Party strategists see winning these seats as key steps in their path back to majority control.
The two anxieties collided when Newsom ran an ad earlier this month effectively bolstering the leading Republican gubernatorial candidate John Cox.
By promoting Cox, Newsom reduced the odds that he would face another Democrat in November and increased his own chances of victory.
But he faced complaints that he was threatening Democratic hopes of recapturing the US House because a Republican in the governors race would give California GOP voters more reason to turn out this fall and thus benefit their candidates for the House.
There are all kinds of unintended consequences that are coming out now, says Mark Baldassare, president and CEO of the non-partisan Public Policy Institute of California.
An experiment that may have backfired .
Under the new system, approved by California voters in a 2010 ballot proposition, the top two finishers in the primary for each office --from governor to US Senator, and US House to the state legislature-advance to the general election, regardless of party.
The plans supporters initially sold it as a way to promote more moderate candidates, to empower independent voters, and to weaken the hold of the two major parties on the electoral process.
But in fact, the complex geometry of these open contests has encouraged a new peak of partisan maneuvering and manipulation, and forced each party to systematically intervene to try to influence the selection of the other sides nominees.
As a senior adviser to one statewide California candidate put it: It is constant three dimensional chess you are playing here..
Though the state has run three previous elections under the top-two rule, this is the first contest that is fully pressure-testing the system.
In 2014, the one previous governors race conducted under these rules, incumbent Democrat Jerry Brown cruised to re-election.
And in the past three elections, Democrats inexplicably failed to mount serious bids against House Republicans in several districts that were trending away from the GOP.
But this year, the open governors seat has drawn four serious Democratic candidates and two Republicans.
In the House, after years of torpor, Democrats are fielding a flood of candidates in five Republican-held House seats around Los Angeles that Hillary Clinton carried against Trump in 2016.
Those seats, as well as two other Republican-held seats in the agricultural Central Valley that Clinton carried, are vital to Democratic hopes of recapturing the overall House majority.
Under this heightened pressure, the top-two system has unquestionably sprung some leaks.
A local failure could have national consequences .
Most attention has focused on the Democratic dilemma in Orange County.
The Democrats began this year with high hopes in the four seats that Clinton carried across that steadily-diversifying county.
But they now face the real risk that Republicans will claim both of the top spots and shut out Democrats for November in three of them.
In descending order of threat, Democrats are confronting that possibility in the seat held by Rep.
Dana Rohrabacher and the districts being vacated by retiring Republicans Ed Royce and Darrell Issa.
(Because there are no meaningful Republican challengers to GOP incumbents Mimi Walters in Orange County and Steve Knight north of Los Angeles, Democrats dont face that risk in those Clinton-won seats.).
In all three of the seats where Democrats face a potential shutout, Republicans have candidates with much stronger resumes in elected office, from former state Assembly member Young Kim and Orange County Board of Supervisors member Shawn Nelson in Royces seat; to former State Assembly GOP Leader Scott Baugh, who is challenging Rohrabacher; to former Assembly member Diane Harkey and current member Rocky Chavez in the Issa seat.
None of the leading Democrats contending for any of the seats hold elected office, or began the race with much name identification in their districts -- a remnant of the partys long-time failure to invest in building its support in Orange County.
Thats made it tougher for any one candidate to consolidate support.
This local failure has forced the national Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee into extraordinary exertions to avoid losing these seats to the GOP in June.
The party committee has invested heavily in voter registration and get-out-the-vote efforts to combat the traditionally low turnout of several key Democratic constituencies during the June primaries.
It has successfully leaned on several lower-tier Democratic candidates to drop out, hoping to consolidate the Democratic vote.
Most dramatically, it has invested $3.5 million into an array of television and radio ads meant to lift a Democrat into the top two.
Thats included negative ads trying to weaken Republican candidates in each race (principally Baugh, Nelson and Chavez).
More controversially, the DCCC has also tried to lift one Democrat from the field by running ads for Gil Cisneros, a lottery winner and philanthropist in the Royce seat, and Harley Rouda, an attorney and entrepreneur in the Rohrabacher district.
And yet even after all this work, Democrats are still biting their nails.
The Democrats are especially on edge about the Rohrabacher seat, where the incumbents weakness is leaving a large number of GOP-leaning votes available to Baugh.
These are all within the margin of error, and thats what is so scary, said Democratic consultant Dave Jacobson, who is advising candidates in the Royce and Rohrabacher seats.
The maneuvering in the governors race is adding to Democratic anxiety and uncertainty.
It has raised the possibility that even if Democrats survive next weeks challenge and place a candidate onto the general election ballot, the Republican odds of holding the Orange County anyway seats may be rising. .
Grumbling about Newsoms maneuvers .
Newsom triggered the controversy earlier this month when he ran his ad criticizing Cox, an underfunded San Diego business executive who lost several races for office while living in Illinois, for being too close to Trump and too opposed to gun control.
Thats the sort of message viewers might expect from Newsom, a liberal Democrat, in the general election.
But airing during the primary, the ad, in effect, came with a big wink: by attacking Cox from the left, Newsom was actually bolstering his credentials with Republican voters and increasing the chances that Cox would finish second next week ahead of any Democrat in the race.
-------------------------------------------
Trump announces tariffs on China, tech crackdown ahead of key trade meeting - Duration: 6:46.
Trump announces tariffs on China, tech crackdown ahead of key trade meeting
President Trump said Tuesday that he would proceed with tariffs on $50 billion in Chinese imports and introduce new limits on Chinese investment in U.S.
high-tech industries as part of a broad campaign to crack down on Chinese acquisition of U.S.
technology.
"The United States will implement specific investment restrictions and enhanced export controls for Chinese people and entities related to the acquisition of industrially significant technology," the White House said in a brief statement.
Specifics of the new limits will be announced by June 30 and will take effect "shortly thereafter," the White House said.
The moves come less than 10 days after Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said that the trade war with China was "on hold.
" Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross is due to arrive in Beijing on Saturday for talks aimed at cooling trade tensions between the two countries.
The president has been seeking Chinese agreement to reduce the $375 billion U.S.
goods trade deficit.
But two days of talks in Washington ended earlier this month with only vague Chinese promises to buy more U.S.
agriculture and energy products.
"The Trump administration is back in attack mode against China after what had appeared to be a temporary truce in the trade tensions," said Eswar Prasad, former head of the International Monetary Fund's China division.
"China's unwillingness to agree to a trade deficit reduction target or make other major concessions has probably emboldened those in the administration who have argued for a hard line stance against China on trade issues.".
The White House statement said the president had been "updated" on several steps following the March release by U.S.
Trade Representative Robert E.
Lighthizer of a study detailing a sweeping Chinese effort to vacuum up American technology through legal and illegal means.
But none of the actions described in the one-page statement are yet certain to take effect.
The White House announcement may be only the latest dizzying turn in Trump's carrot-and-stick approach to trade negotiations.
After threatening tariffs on up to $150 billion in Chinese products in April, the president settled earlier this month for what Mnuchin described as a "framework" for progress, following two days of bargaining with Chinese officials in Washington.
Now, tariffs on the first $50 billion are back on track — though the president could change course again.
"The tariffs and the other stuff are totally discretionary and can be waived," said Jeff Moon, a former U.S.
trade negotiator.
The announced measures also come amid bipartisan criticism of the president's softening of penalties for ZTE, a Chinese telecom company that had traded with Iran and North Korea in defiance of U.S.
sanctions.
"I think this is a bone to the Congress.
I don't know if it's the right thing to do," said Derek Scissors, a China expert at the conversative American Enterprise Institute.
Tariffs of 25 percent will be applied to Chinese imports containing important technologies, including those related to Beijing's made-in-China 2025 development program, the White House said.
The final tariff list will be made public by June 15 with the new import taxes taking effect shortly thereafter.
The Chinese government, meanwhile, may interpret the president's latest shift as a response to domestic political pressure, he added.
"They may have been surprised by the level of concern, especially among Republicans, about ZTE," Moon said.
If the resumption of Trump's tariff threat is designed to put pressure on Beijing in advance of Ross's arrival on Saturday, it could backfire.
"This kind of public pressure could make it harder for China to respond in a conciliatory fashion," said Claire Reade, another former U.S.
trade official who is now with Arnold & Porter.
Failure to make significant progress in diplomatic talks before June 15 could trigger the U.S.
tariffs and quick Chinese retaliation, setting in motion the downward spiral in relations that the two sides have been trying to avoid, Reade said.
-------------------------------------------
Sessions Gets Mega Bad News From Nunes on Live TV - Duration: 11:10.
Sessions Gets Mega Bad News From Nunes on Live TV
For more than a year, the various congressional committees looking into an assortment of allegations
of wrongdoing on the part of executive branch agencies in the prior administration have
been met with delays and a lack of cooperation by the current administration in their requests
for pertinent documents and information.
That has compelled the congressional committees — chief among them the House Intelligence
Committee led by California Rep. Devin Nunes — to have to resort to threats of legal
action to compel cooperation from the Department of Justice, and even then the documents are
typically heavily redacted and nearly useless.
But Nunes revealed Sunday in a phone interview on "Fox & Friends" that he'd had enough
of the stonewalling and threatened Attorney General Jeff Sessions with a charge of being
in contempt of Congress if immediate cooperation with his requests didn't ensue.
"Two weeks ago we sent a letter to Attorney General Jeff Sessions, a classified letter.
Per usual, it was ignored," stated Nunes.
"So last week we sent a subpoena.
Then on Thursday we discovered they're not going to comply with our subpoena on some
very important information that we need."
"The only thing we can do is we have to move quickly to hold the Attorney General
of the United States in contempt.
And that's what I'm going to press for this week," the congressman added.
Though it is unclear exactly what information Nunes was seeking that the DOJ had refused
to turn over, a response letter from the DOJ to his request dated May 3 revealed that it
pertained to an as-yet unnamed specific individual who was considered by the DOJ to be highly
valuable in terms of a counterintelligence operation.
That letter from Assistant Attorney General Stephen Boyd — obtained by investigative
reporter Sara Carter — read, in part: "After careful evaluation and following consultations
with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Federal Bureau of Investigation,
and the White House, the Department has determined that, consistent with applicable law and longstanding
Executive Branch policy, it is not in a position to provide the information responsive to your
request regarding a specific individual.
"Disclosure of responsive information to such requests can risk severe consequences,
including potential loss of human lives, damage to relationships with valued international
partners, compromise of ongoing criminal investigations, and interference with intelligence activities,"
Boyd added.
But it was obvious from Nunes' interview on Fox News that he was done accepting excuses
from the DOJ and was prepared to take drastic action if necessary to compel their cooperation
with his ongoing investigation into alleged abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Act Courts and warrant procedures by the Obama administration's DOJ and FBI.
Bearing in mind the alleged FISA abuse had led to special counsel Robert Mueller Special
Counsel investigation into alleged Russian interference and collusion with the Trump
campaign in the 2016 election, Nunes noted the remarks from a federal judge in Virginia
that heavily criticized the scope and secrecy of that investigation.
"If you have a counterintelligence investigation opened up on you as an American citizen, this
is done secretly with only a few people's knowledge.
And if they go to court, they go to a secret court to get a warrant on you like they did
with Carter Page," Nunes said.
"So there is a very small apparatus in our country that holds the check-and-balance authority
between Congress and the executive branch, and when the Obama administration decided
to move forward on a counterintelligence investigation, in a campaign of all things, that's how
we've gotten to here," he added.
To be sure, issues of national security are a real thing and it is understandable that
the DOJ would be hesitant to provide information to Congress that could conceivably reveal
secret information and place lives and ongoing investigations at risk.
However, claims of "national security" can't be used as a blanket excuse to deny
all requests from Congress as part of their duty to provide oversight of the executive
branch and the actions of their agencies.
Nunes has made it clear that he is serious about getting to the bottom of the alleged
misdeeds his committee is investigating, and he is willing to take serious action against
the current head of the DOJ to force compliance with their oversight requests.
Hopefully that action proves unnecessary.
Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers' newsfeeds and
is instead promoting mainstream media sources.
When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content.
Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family.
Thank you.
-------------------------------------------
FBI Found Guilty Of Planting Mole In Trump Campaign - Duration: 12:35.
FBI Found Guilty Of Planting Mole In Trump Campaign
Former FBI director James Comey planted an FBI mole within the Trump campaign, under
direct orders from the Obama administration.
According to a bombshell Wall Street Journal investigation by Kimberly Strassel, Robert
Mueller relied on intelligence provided by an embedded FBI agent within the Trump campaign
to aide the Russia investigation.
Zerohedge.com reports: After the White House caved to Rosenstein and Nunes was barred from
seeing the documents, it also emerged that this same intelligence had already been shared
with Special Counsel Robert Mueller as part of his investigation into alleged Russian
involvement in the 2016 US election.
On Wednesday afternoon, however, news emerged that Nunes and House Oversight and Government
Reform Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-SC) would receive a classified Thursday briefing
at the DOJ on the documents.
This is, to put it lightly, incredibly significant.
Why?
Because it appears that the FBI may have had a mole embedded in the Trump campaign.
In a bombshell op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, Kimberly Strassel shares a few key insights
about recent developments.
Perhaps we should start with the ending and let you take it from there.
Needless to say Strassel's claims, if true, would have wide ranging implications for the
CIA, FBI, DOJ and former Obama administration officials.
Strassel concludes:
"I believe I know the name of the informant, but my intelligence sources did not provide
it to me and refuse to confirm it.
It would therefore be irresponsible to publish it."
Authored by Kimberley Strassel, op-ed via The Wall Street Journal,
About That FBI 'Source'
Did the bureau engage in outright spying against the 2016 Trump campaign?
The Department of Justice lost its latest battle with Congress Thursday when it allowed
House Intelligence Committee members to view classified documents about a top-secret intelligence
source that was part of the FBI's investigation of the Trump campaign.
Even without official confirmation of that source's name, the news so far holds some
stunning implications.
Among them is that the Justice Department and Federal Bureau of Investigation outright
hid critical information from a congressional investigation.
In a Thursday press conference, Speaker Paul Ryan bluntly noted that Intelligence Chairman
Devin Nunes's request for details on this secret source was "wholly appropriate,"
"completely within the scope" of the committee's long-running FBI investigation, and "something
that probably should have been answered a while ago."
Translation: The department knew full well it should have turned this material over to
congressional investigators last year, but instead deliberately concealed it.
House investigators nonetheless sniffed out a name, and Mr. Nunes in recent weeks issued
a letter and a subpoena demanding more details.
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein's response was to double down—accusing the
House of "extortion" and delivering a speech in which he claimed that "declining
to open the FBI's files to review" is a constitutional "duty."
Justice asked the White House to back its stonewall.
And it even began spinning that daddy of all superspook arguments—that revealing any
detail about this particular asset could result in "loss of human lives."
This is desperation, and it strongly suggests that whatever is in these files is going to
prove very uncomfortable to the FBI.
The bureau already has some explaining to do.
Thanks to the Washington Post's unnamed law-enforcement leakers, we know Mr. Nunes's
request deals with a "top secret intelligence source" of the FBI and CIA, who is a U.S.
citizen and who was involved in the Russia collusion probe.
When government agencies refer to sources, they mean people who appear to be average
citizens but use their profession or contacts to spy for the agency.
Ergo, we might take this to mean that the FBI secretly had a person on the payroll who
used his or her non-FBI credentials to interact in some capacity with the Trump campaign.
This would amount to spying, and it is hugely disconcerting.
It would also be a major escalation from the electronic surveillance we already knew about,
which was bad enough.
Obama political appointees rampantly "unmasked" Trump campaign officials to monitor their
conversations, while the FBI played dirty with its surveillance warrant against Carter
Page, failing to tell the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that its supporting information
came from the Hillary Clinton campaign.
Now we find it may have also been rolling out human intelligence, John Le Carré style,
to infiltrate the Trump campaign.
Which would lead to another big question for the FBI: When?
The bureau has been doggedly sticking with its story that a tip in July 2016 about the
drunken ramblings of George Papadopoulos launched its counterintelligence probe.
Still, the players in this affair—the FBI, former Director Jim Comey, the Steele dossier
authors—have been suspiciously vague on the key moments leading up to that launch
date.
When precisely was the Steele dossier delivered to the FBI?
When precisely did the Papadopoulos information come in?
And to the point, when precisely was this human source operating?
Because if it was prior to that infamous Papadopoulos tip, then the FBI isn't being straight.
It would mean the bureau was spying on the Trump campaign prior to that moment.
And that in turn would mean that the FBI had been spurred to act on the basis of something
other than a junior campaign aide's loose lips.
We also know that among the Justice Department's stated reasons for not complying with the
Nunes subpoena was its worry that to do so might damage international relationships.
This suggests the "source" may be overseas, have ties to foreign intelligence, or both.
That's notable, given the highly suspicious role foreigners have played in this escapade.
It was an Australian diplomat who reported the Papadopoulos conversation.
Dossier author Christopher Steele is British, used to work for MI6, and retains ties to
that spy agency as well as to a network of former spooks.
It was a former British diplomat who tipped off Sen. John McCain to the dossier.
How this "top secret" source fits into this puzzle could matter deeply.
I believe I know the name of the informant, but my intelligence sources did not provide
it to me and refuse to confirm it.
It would therefore be irresponsible to publish it.
But what is clear is that we've barely scratched the surface of the FBI's 2016 behavior,
and the country will never get the straight story until President Trump moves to declassify
everything possible.
It's time to rip off the Band-Aid.
-------------------------------------------
TIMES UP! Trump WARNS He Will Officially DEMAND Jeff Sessions' DOJ Look Into Obama Regime Using - Duration: 11:10.
TIMES UP! Trump WARNS He Will Officially DEMAND Jeff Sessions' DOJ Look Into Obama Regime
Using
On Thursday night, the brilliant conservative firebrand, Mark Levin appeared on the Hannity
Show where he slammed the "cabal of FBI agents" who took it upon themselves to investigate
a presidential campaign.
Levin said the interference in the election was not by Russians but by the U.S. intel
community.
He called on Sessions to investigate actions by former CIA director John Brennan and former
DNI James Clapper and let the chips fall where they may.
"I don't care what Jeff Sessions does.
He's the president and tell him, I want you to investigate the activities that took
place in this election, let the chips fall where they may.
The interference in this election by the FBI, the CIA, the national intelligence I want
to know what Brennan did, I want to know what Clapper did.
I want to know what Comey did not because I'm going to punish them.
You'll make determinations about this," he said.
Mueller investigation oddly enough, Sean, has disclosed has revealed that the greatest
perpetrator of against the American people was the federal government.
The greatest perpetrator against the American people was the federal government, was the
FBI, the CIA national intelligence director, and this is a very– –Real Clear Politics
Today, President Trump took to Twitter to warn that he will officially demand the DOJ
investigate the Obama regime's interference in the 2016 presidential election for allegedly
infiltrating and spying on the Trump campaign for poltical purposes.
Trump just tweeted: I hereby demand, and will do so officially tomorrow, that the Department
of Justice look into whether or not the FBI/DOJ infiltrated or surveilled the Trump Campaign
for Political Purposes – and if any such demands or requests were made by people within
the Obama Administration!
-------------------------------------------
Barack Just Stuck It To Fallen Soldiers With Holiday Honoring Himself As Hero After Memorial Day - Duration: 4:30.
Barack Just Stuck It To Fallen Soldiers With Holiday Honoring Himself As Hero After Memorial
Day.
As we remembered the fallen heroes who granted Americans the right to be free, we can't
help but remember the one who stole the glory for himself.
The military under Barak Obama saw their pay drop, or be taken away.
They were sent into wars with their hands tied and we watched Navy sailors be taken
prisoner by Iran.
We were all in disbelief when he drew the "red line" in the sand and then when Syria
used chemicals to kill it's own people Obama did nothing.
Under Obama's watch, we witnessed his administration create a racial divide in America that we
haven't since the 1960's.
More people were on welfare, and out of work.
He signed into law numerous bills handcuffing businesses and creating debilitating regulations.
But with all of the failure, a Commemorative Holiday honoring Barak Obama was born, it's
not ironic it was done by the failed state of Illinois.
Opposing Views reports: Illinois has officially commemorated Aug.
4 as a state holiday to honor former President Barack Obama.
An original proposal for the holiday would have allowed for businesses and schools to
shut down on the date, but that was rejected by the state legislature and replaced with
a celebration without time off.
On Aug. 4, GOP Gov. Bruce Rauner of Illinois signed his state's Senate Bill 55 into law.
The legislation was introduced by Democratic state Sen. Emil Jones III of Illinois and
proposed establishing Obama's birthday as a commemorative statewide holiday, WMAQ reports.
Under Senate Bill 55, a new Barack Obama Day will be "observed throughout the State as
a day set apart to honor the 44th President of the United States of America who began
his career serving the People of Illinois State Senate and the United States Senate,
and dedicated his life to protecting the rights of Americans and building bridges across communities."
Jones' bill did not receive a single opposing vote in the Illinois Legislature, although
several lawmakers did abstain from supporting or blunting the legislation.
The commemorative holiday will go into effect on Aug. 4, 2018.
On March 21, a House bill that proposed a legal holiday to commemorate the president
was rejected.
The legislation would have closed down state facilities and schools, and would have given
businesses the option of closing shop to celebrate Obama's birthday.
The bill was unable to accrue the 60 votes necessary to pass in the Illinois Senate,
the Chicago Tribune reports.
GOP lawmakers in the Illinois legislature supported a celebration of Obama but were
against making the date a legal holiday.
Rauner cited concerns that closing down businesses annually on Aug. 4 could cost the state up
to $19.2 million in personnel costs and lost productivity.
Lawmakers who were in favor of the legislation asserted that Obama's stature in the state
merited a legal holiday.
"Personally, to me, [Obama] helped me to get motivated, get up in my community and
organize my community to be the change that we wanted to see, and we are seeing right
now on the ground," said Democratic state Rep. Sonya Harper of Illinois, a co-sponsor
of the House bill.
In February, Rauner asserted that a potential Barack Obama Day should not "be a formal
holiday with paid, forced time off, but I think it should be a day of acknowledgment
and celebration."
Now the former president will have a commemorative holiday in the state where he got his start
in politics, similar to former President Ronald Reagan.
In July 2010, former GOP Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California signed legislation to establish
Reagan's birthday, Feb. 6, as a commemorative holiday in The Golden State, according to
KPCC.
At least we can be thankful that the bill wasn't voted into law and he only received
a Commemorative Holiday.
Even still, it's underserved.
Especially since Obama has done nothing to improve the city of Chicago which only got
worse under his administration.
what do you think about this?
Please Share this news and Scroll down to comment below and don't forget to subscribe
top stories today.
No comments:
Post a Comment