The Inevitable New The Inevitable Trump Mocking Thread

JULY 22, 2019
For Being Such an Idiot, Trump is Pretty Smart
By Brian C. Joondeph
We have been hearing now for four years, ever since that escalator ride at Trump Tower, how then-candidate, now-President Trump is such an idiot. The media, Democrats, and NeverTrumpers, virtually in lockstep assured us that Trump would never be the Republican nominee. When he was, they doubled down promising that he would never be president. Every so-called opinion poll confirmed their predictions.

So who turned out to be smart, winning the White House, and who turned out to be a bunch of buffoons? Yet they still couldn’t admit that they were wrong, predicting that Trump would be impeached or that he would resign from office under intense pressure from critics and scandal. From Stormy Daniels and Michael Avenatti to Robert Mueller to Megan Rapinoe, each one was portrayed as the dragon-slayer ready to bring down Trump.

All have come and gone like the seasons, bringing down nothing but their reputations and what little integrity they might have possessed. Yet Trump haters won’t give up. Trump is still too stupid and incompetent to be president, they tell us. He is an embarrassment to the country and the world.

Yet on Friday, July 19, Trump sits at 49 percent total approval in the Rasmussen Daily Presidential Tracking Poll, four points higher than his predecessor, Mr. Perfect, exactly eight years ago. These approval numbers are despite what many have described as a bad week for the president with his “unforced error” of going after the four lovely patriots of the “Jihad Squad” and telling them that if America is so bad, they are welcome to “go back” to somewhere, anywhere, that is more to their liking.



Screen grab from YouTube

Brit Hume, godfather of the Republican D.C. establishment, not a NeverTrumper, but more of a SometimesTrumper, said Trump’s tweets were “politically stupid.” When Rush Limbaugh and others suggested that Trump’s tweets were strategic and calculated rather than stupid, Hume dismissed this immediately: “I think that's too smart by half, too clever by half, Trump couldn't put something like this together, are you kidding me?”

Of course, Trump couldn’t put something like this together. He isn’t clever enough. Yet he was smart enough to defeat 17 competent and experienced contenders for the Republican nomination in 2016 despite having never run for political office. And he is still president after two and a half years of nonstop negative media coverage and criticism from Democrats and many Republicans.

More in Home









Reuters reluctantly reported: “Republican support for Trump rises after racially charged tweets.” Jake Tapper, liberal CNN mouthpiece, had to acknowledge, “Dem sources admit Trump's 'brilliant' move to make stars of AOC, Omar.”

So, which is it? Did Trump stupidly make a racist, sexist, xenophobic, nativist, white-supremacist tweet as the media and NeverTrumpers claim? Or did he just make the Jihad Squad the new face of the Democratic Party?

Who hasn’t been in the news this past week? How about the 20-plus Democrats vying for the party’s nomination to go up against Goliath Trump next summer? Other than news of the next Democrat primary debate or who is ahead of who in the latest poll, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Beto O'Rourke, and Pete Buttigieg are no longer newsworthy.

Instead they, along with Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the Democrat party, have been forced to rally around Ocasio-Cortez and Omar. That seems a pretty smart move by Trump.

Axios recently polled what it called “white, non-college voters who embraced Donald Trump in 2016 but are needed by Democrats in swing House districts.” Only 22 percent had a favorable view of Ocasio-Cortez with shockingly only 9 percent viewing Omar favorably. This same poll noted that socialism was viewed negatively by 69 percent of swing voters.

With a few tweets and comments, Trump has rebranded the Democratic Party as the party of socialism, with its new party leaders viewed negatively by the vast majority of swing voters.

Are Republicans fleeing the party over Trump’s tweets? Hardly. GOP support for Trump rose this past week. His rally in North Carolina was as enthusiastic as ever. And those hapless Democrats running for their party’s nomination became yesterday’s news as quickly as Trump-slayer of-the-week Megan Rapinoe.

Democrats, in a fleeting moment of honesty, understand the brilliance of Trump’s tweets and framing of the Democrat party, as they admitted to Jake Tapper. Rasmussen also reported that by a 42 to 29 percent margin, likely Democrat voters want the party to be more like Nancy Pelosi than Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Yet thanks to President Trump, Nancy Pelosi has had to shift towards Ocasio-Cortez rather than vice versa, defending the Jihad Squad against Trump’s tweets.

For Pelosi it’s the path of least resistance. If she denounces the squad, there will be an internal civil war within her party. If she defends them, she makes them the face of the party. Trump has put her in a box.

Some may call it 4-D chess. Instead it may be decades of street smarts developed in the trenches of the New York City real estate development world, along with the branding experience of running a successful television reality show for a decade. What it is not is Trump being stupid.

It’s not just politics. Trump’s supposed stupidity is on display elsewhere. His tough trade war with China is reaping benefits. The U.S. economy is humming along and as the Wall Street Journal reports: “China’s State-Driven Growth Model Is Running Out of Gas.” Trump has visited North Korea and has a constructive and personal relationship with Kim Jong Un, a first for an American president.

Mexico is suddenly securing its southern border and Trump is doing via executive order what Congress is too lazy to do for asylum-seeking and birthright citizenship.

Spygate is ready to unfold and burst, with declassifications and hopefully accountability for its wrongdoers.

Jeffrey Epstein, the latest Trump-slayer for the wishful thinking Democrats and media, will be anything but. Does anyone really believe that if Epstein had dirt on Trump, we wouldn’t have known it before the election? Epstein and the Clintons were good pals. If Epstein had incriminating photos of videos of Trump with underage girls, Hillary would have used this in 2016 rather than paying millions for a phony dossier. Instead like everything else, Epstein will likely backfire on the left, as Vanity Fair described, “It’s going to be staggering, the amount of names.”

For being so stupid, Trump continues to outsmart the smart set on the left, the media geniuses, Hollywood, academia, and the Democrat party. His opponents keep calling him an idiot and he runs circles around them. Trump is winning, and his supporters are not yet tired of it.
 
Sheriff Joe said:
JULY 22, 2019
For Being Such an Idiot, Trump is Pretty Smart
By Brian C. Joondeph
We have been hearing now for four years, ever since that escalator ride at Trump Tower, how then-candidate, now-President Trump is such an idiot. The media, Democrats, and NeverTrumpers, virtually in lockstep assured us that Trump would never be the Republican nominee. When he was, they doubled down promising that he would never be president. Every so-called opinion poll confirmed their predictions.

So who turned out to be smart, winning the White House, and who turned out to be a bunch of buffoons? Yet they still couldn’t admit that they were wrong, predicting that Trump would be impeached or that he would resign from office under intense pressure from critics and scandal. From Stormy Daniels and Michael Avenatti to Robert Mueller to Megan Rapinoe, each one was portrayed as the dragon-slayer ready to bring down Trump.

All have come and gone like the seasons, bringing down nothing but their reputations and what little integrity they might have possessed. Yet Trump haters won’t give up. Trump is still too stupid and incompetent to be president, they tell us. He is an embarrassment to the country and the world.

Yet on Friday, July 19, Trump sits at 49 percent total approval in the Rasmussen Daily Presidential Tracking Poll, four points higher than his predecessor, Mr. Perfect, exactly eight years ago. These approval numbers are despite what many have described as a bad week for the president with his “unforced error” of going after the four lovely patriots of the “Jihad Squad” and telling them that if America is so bad, they are welcome to “go back” to somewhere, anywhere, that is more to their liking.



Screen grab from YouTube

Brit Hume, godfather of the Republican D.C. establishment, not a NeverTrumper, but more of a SometimesTrumper, said Trump’s tweets were “politically stupid.” When Rush Limbaugh and others suggested that Trump’s tweets were strategic and calculated rather than stupid, Hume dismissed this immediately: “I think that's too smart by half, too clever by half, Trump couldn't put something like this together, are you kidding me?”

Of course, Trump couldn’t put something like this together. He isn’t clever enough. Yet he was smart enough to defeat 17 competent and experienced contenders for the Republican nomination in 2016 despite having never run for political office. And he is still president after two and a half years of nonstop negative media coverage and criticism from Democrats and many Republicans.

More in Home









Reuters reluctantly reported: “Republican support for Trump rises after racially charged tweets.” Jake Tapper, liberal CNN mouthpiece, had to acknowledge, “Dem sources admit Trump's 'brilliant' move to make stars of AOC, Omar.”

So, which is it? Did Trump stupidly make a racist, sexist, xenophobic, nativist, white-supremacist tweet as the media and NeverTrumpers claim? Or did he just make the Jihad Squad the new face of the Democratic Party?

Who hasn’t been in the news this past week? How about the 20-plus Democrats vying for the party’s nomination to go up against Goliath Trump next summer? Other than news of the next Democrat primary debate or who is ahead of who in the latest poll, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Beto O'Rourke, and Pete Buttigieg are no longer newsworthy.

Instead they, along with Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the Democrat party, have been forced to rally around Ocasio-Cortez and Omar. That seems a pretty smart move by Trump.

Axios recently polled what it called “white, non-college voters who embraced Donald Trump in 2016 but are needed by Democrats in swing House districts.” Only 22 percent had a favorable view of Ocasio-Cortez with shockingly only 9 percent viewing Omar favorably. This same poll noted that socialism was viewed negatively by 69 percent of swing voters.

With a few tweets and comments, Trump has rebranded the Democratic Party as the party of socialism, with its new party leaders viewed negatively by the vast majority of swing voters.

Are Republicans fleeing the party over Trump’s tweets? Hardly. GOP support for Trump rose this past week. His rally in North Carolina was as enthusiastic as ever. And those hapless Democrats running for their party’s nomination became yesterday’s news as quickly as Trump-slayer of-the-week Megan Rapinoe.

Democrats, in a fleeting moment of honesty, understand the brilliance of Trump’s tweets and framing of the Democrat party, as they admitted to Jake Tapper. Rasmussen also reported that by a 42 to 29 percent margin, likely Democrat voters want the party to be more like Nancy Pelosi than Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Yet thanks to President Trump, Nancy Pelosi has had to shift towards Ocasio-Cortez rather than vice versa, defending the Jihad Squad against Trump’s tweets.

For Pelosi it’s the path of least resistance. If she denounces the squad, there will be an internal civil war within her party. If she defends them, she makes them the face of the party. Trump has put her in a box.

Some may call it 4-D chess. Instead it may be decades of street smarts developed in the trenches of the New York City real estate development world, along with the branding experience of running a successful television reality show for a decade. What it is not is Trump being stupid.

It’s not just politics. Trump’s supposed stupidity is on display elsewhere. His tough trade war with China is reaping benefits. The U.S. economy is humming along and as the Wall Street Journal reports: “China’s State-Driven Growth Model Is Running Out of Gas.” Trump has visited North Korea and has a constructive and personal relationship with Kim Jong Un, a first for an American president.

Mexico is suddenly securing its southern border and Trump is doing via executive order what Congress is too lazy to do for asylum-seeking and birthright citizenship.

Spygate is ready to unfold and burst, with declassifications and hopefully accountability for its wrongdoers.

Jeffrey Epstein, the latest Trump-slayer for the wishful thinking Democrats and media, will be anything but. Does anyone really believe that if Epstein had dirt on Trump, we wouldn’t have known it before the election? Epstein and the Clintons were good pals. If Epstein had incriminating photos of videos of Trump with underage girls, Hillary would have used this in 2016 rather than paying millions for a phony dossier. Instead like everything else, Epstein will likely backfire on the left, as Vanity Fair described, “It’s going to be staggering, the amount of names.”

For being so stupid, Trump continues to outsmart the smart set on the left, the media geniuses, Hollywood, academia, and the Democrat party. His opponents keep calling him an idiot and he runs circles around them. Trump is winning, and his supporters are not yet tired of it.
Click to expand...
He likes fishing. Cheerleading the fact checked Fracking President is a classic.
 
Just let me point out that if the CIA has spies in an unfriendly country and that country announces that they have imprisoned those spies, the proper response of our government is to deny that they are spies. On the other hand, if an unfriendly government announces they have captured CIA spies and the CIA knows that to be false (they don't have any there, or, more likely, it's not the ones who were captured), the proper response of our government is to deny that they are spies.

I would read that novel just to see how it turns out in the end.
 
nbc-mueller-testifies.png

WaPo, Politico: You know Mueller-mas will be a bust (again), right?

ED MORRISSEY Posted at 4:41 pm on July 22, 2019

Of course we know it will be a bust, but at least a couple of outlets are getting ahead of the curve. The media has begun ramping up chatter over Robert Mueller’s testimony on Wednesday — as I’m writing this, NBC’s sending around a promotional e-mail complete with a logo, seen above. Their missive also pledges to have five anchors working the gig spread across two platforms, NBC proper and MSNBC.












Nothing like setting expectations! To be fair, everyone seems to be jumping into the deep end of the Mueller pool (via Twitchy):



https://twitter.com/bjv1129/status/1153343132605603841

Dear @StephenKing So your research before you spread #FakeNews @JaniceDean @FoxNews @Carolde https://twitter.com/JaniceDean/status/1153339739237474310 …


Janice Dean

✔@JaniceDean

Just like your books, this is fiction. @BretBaier is anchoring coverage with @marthamaccallum all day Wednesday. But keep spreading fake news, Mr. King. https://twitter.com/stephenking/status/1152974779214946304 …


16
9:36 AM - Jul 22, 2019 · Pen Argyl, PA
Twitter Ads info and privacy

See Belinda Thomma's other Tweets





The Washington Post, however, sounds deeply skeptical that Mueller will say anything worthy of the media circus that will launch the day after tomorrow … or anything new at all:

On Wednesday, when he delivers long-awaited testimony about his investigation into President Trump and Russian interference in the 2016 election, Democrats are hoping to coax from him the kind of dramatic moments that could galvanize public opinion against the president. Republicans, meanwhile, are eager to elicit testimony that shows the investigation was biased from its inception.

Those who know him best are skeptical he will meet either side’s expectations.

“For anybody hoping he’s going to provide new information or evidence against the president, I think many people will be very disappointed,” said John Pistole, who served as Mueller’s deputy for years when he was FBI director. “And then on the other side of the aisle, some may be disappointed to find out that he’s not a demagogue of the left.”

Pistole reminds the Post that Mueller dislikes congressional appearances anyway, but Mueller has already specifically made it clear he has nothing to add to his report. He held a press conference after its full release explicitly discouraging committees from attempting to force him to appear, telling them to read the report instead. Mueller had pushed the limits of Department of Justice guidelines on the report to AG William Barr, who then released almost all of it to the public.







Pistole offers a even-money prediction:

Pistole said he expects Mueller to be “as unresponsive as possible, while telling the truth. I think his first approach will be, ‘Read the report and form your own conclusions.’ He’s no longer a government employee, and he can tell them to pound sand, not that he would use those words.”

By the end of the day, who knows? Mueller might well use those specific words for the umpteenth time someone demands to know something that’s already in his report.







Politico also tries to do a little bar-lowering today as well. In an opinion piece, Fordham law professor Jed Shugerman offers his own prediction, as well as the one piece of advice that is guaranteed to be ignored on Wednesday:

If recent history is any guide, Robert Mueller’s much-anticipated Capitol Hill appearance on Wednesday will fizzle into a mix of political grandstanding by the questioners and frustratingly narrow answers from the star witness. Congress’s biggest public chance to highlight the links between the Trump campaign and Russia, and the president’s acts of obstruction, will become a chance for members to showcase their wit, score politcial points and maybe even go viral with a dramatic exchange. This one was originally scheduled for last week, and a main reason for its delay is that the junior members of the Judiciary committee wouldn’t have enough time to get their own questions in.

So far, the solution has been to expand the hearing time. Here’s a better one: None of the members should ask the questions at all.

Their expert staffers should ask all the questions—not just to resolve the battle of egos, but to give Congress its only chance to make any real progress on the issue.

Here’s an even better suggestion: no one asks any questions. Instead of this hearing, everyone should resolve to do two things — read the report, and then do their jobs rather than farm them out to special counsels. If Congress is unhappy with Mueller’s conclusions, Mueller’s not the problem. The legal “mistakes” to which Shugerman refers later all come from the same source, which is Congress’ demand to have the executive branch investigate the president instead of Congress itself. Democrats in particular raised Mueller high up on a pedestal, threatening to pass laws protecting an inferior executive branch employee from his superiors and making him into Super-Mueller, at least until they read his report.






Finally, even Jerrold Nadler is worried that expectations might be set so high that Mueller’s appearance comes across as a “dud”:







House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler said on Sunday he hopes former special counsel Robert Mueller’s testimony before the House won’t be “a dud.”

“What if the whole thing ends up being a dud?” Chris Wallace asked the New York Democrat on “Fox News Sunday.”

“Well,” Nadler responded, “we hope it won’t end up being a dud. We’re going to ask specific questions — ‘look at page 344, paragraph 2, please read it. Does that describe an obstruction of justice? Did you find that the president did that?’

And when Mueller says It depends on the context and intent as I wrote on page 344 paragraph 3, what then? The word “dud” does come to mind. Democrats had better be ready for the wave of ennui that sweeps across America everywhere except in the Beltway bubble.
 
Comey-eyebrow.jpg

Oh my: IG report to allege Comey lied to Trump — and spied on him

ED MORRISSEY Posted at 8:41 am on July 22, 2019

If RealClearInvestigations’ sources accurately describe Inspector General Michael Horowitz’ upcoming report, it’s no wonder Donald Trump fired James Comey. According to two sources reportedly briefed on the upcoming Horowitz report, the former FBI director repeatedly lied about not targeting Trump in his probe into Russian interference in the 2016 election. Comey also had what amounted to a spy in the White House, raising the specter of J. Edgar Hoover all over again:










Sources tell RealClearInvestigations that Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz will soon file a report with evidence indicating that Comey was misleading the president. Even as he repeatedly assured Trump that he was not a target, the former director was secretly trying to build a conspiracy case against the president, while at times acting as an investigative agent.

Two U.S. officials briefed on the inspector general’s investigation of possible FBI misconduct said Comey was essentially “running a covert operation against” the president, starting with a private “defensive briefing” he gave Trump just weeks before his inauguration. They said Horowitz has examined high-level FBI text messages and other communications indicating Comey was actually conducting a “counterintelligence assessment” of Trump during that January 2017 meeting in New York.

In addition to adding notes of his meetings and phone calls with Trump to the official FBI case file, Comey had an agent inside the White House who reported back to FBI headquarters about Trump and his aides, according to other officials familiar with the matter.

RCI’s Paul Sperry goes into considerably more detail, so be sure to read all of his report. How much of this actually ends up in Horowitz’ finished version is anyone’s guess. Usually, these reports get passed around to various impacted department heads for feedback and revisions. Sperry notes that the report isn’t expected out until September, which means edits and revisions might still take place. And, curiously, Sperry doesn’t offer much of anything at all on what is supposed to be central to Horowitz’ investigation — the use of the Steele dossier to get a FISA surveillance warrant on Carter Page. Either that part might be a dud, or perhaps Horowitz is playing that one a little closer to the vest.






If Sperry’s sources are accurate, and ifHorowitz can document all this, hoo boy. The allegation that Comey repeatedly lied to Trump about his status in Comey’s probe may not be impossible to explain; if Trump was suspected of espionage, the FBI wouldn’t have wanted him to know it too soon. The problem with this explanation is that the FBI had no evidence of any such suspicion. The Horowitz report will supposedly confirm that, but Robert Mueller has already done that work for Horowitz. Under those circumstances, Comey acted with significant insubordination to his superior and constitutional officer, which matters even if Comey didn’t like Trump or think he should be president.






Spying on Trump by coopting one of his aides hikes that to a level not seen since the FBI’s bad old days. It’s true that the FBI has the main charter for domestic counterespionage activities, but the FBI is not supposed to spy on elected officials — not without bulletproof substantiation of a threat. And again, we know now that the FBI never had even a reasonable suspicion to spy on Trump.






At least in RCI’s telling, the FBI under Comey had reverted to its J. Edgar roots and was attempting to manipulate the American political system for its director’s ends. If that’s also Horowitz’ telling, then Comey’s firing averted a disaster. This also provides significant context for the claims of obstruction of justice against Trump in the Mueller report. If Comey had corrupted the FBI in this manner, Trump was well within his authority to put an end to it and not to cooperate with a poisoned FBI operation targeting his administration.







The rest of us will have to wait until September to get a read of Horowitz’ take on these issues. If RCI proves prophetic, will the media narrative on the Russia-collusion investigation reflect those changes if they arise in September?
 
JULY 23, 2019
Tlaib isn't 'of color'
By Frank Friday
Racist. As the definition goes, that’s what they call somebody who wins an argument with a liberal. Sounds like a lot of liberals are losing the argument to President Trump this last week, as the media and the Democrats have rocked the heavens with cries of “racist”, for Trump suggesting that certain far-left congresswomen might be happier in another country.

Trump’s rhetoric may be ham-fisted, but his timing, as always, is spot on. The walls are closing in on Ilhan Omar, the most enthusiastically hateful member of Congress. Evidence of her immigration fraud is overwhelming and will only intensify as more media outlets have to cover the story. She will be an enormous lingering embarrassment to her party. The only question is, how will the U.S. Attorney in the Twin Cities, Erica McDonald, proceed? She is definitely plugged into the GOP establishment of that state and is well aware of the need for a grand jury to look into this. But will she have the guts to follow the law, or just wimp out, in another case of Minnesota nice? I am not hopeful.

Perhaps, we can be more optimistic about another guy screaming the loudest about racist Trump; Rep. Elijah Cummings, whose wife’s charity received millions in a pay-to-play scheme. Baltimore Democrats are not only corrupt, but so sloppy they often leave the feds no choice but to prosecute.

212384_5_.png
Anyway, it strikes me as odd that no one has yet pointed out the most glaring fact about the Squad of Four “women of color” running amok in the Congress: one of them is obviously a white woman. Which rather makes calling their critics racist even more absurd. Rashida Tlaib was born in Detroit of Palestinian Arab ancestry. Arabs from the Near East are white, and always have been, as far as the U.S. Census Bureau and American society at large is concerned.

In the supercharged race hustle of today’s left-wing politics, though, everyone wants super-victim racial status. Not many American politicos are actually full descendants of black American slaves, so we have a lot them scrambling to fit under the title “brown” or “of color.” So far, none of the many white ethnic groups of the Near East -- Greek, Jew, Arab, Turk, Kurd, Armenian, etc. -- have been able to achieve this transformation and make it stick. But left-wing Arabs and Persians are fighting to make it so, and Tlaib takes every opportunity to tell Speaker Pelosi that she and her gal pals are all women of color.(Never mind that ethnic groups from the Near East are relative newcomers to America and have no history of mistreatment in this country.)

You know this has got to be killing Dems like Pelosi and her allies, who would love to play the “of color” trope themselves -- ancestry South Italy or Jewish -- but would get clobbered worse than Rachel Dolezal, if they actually crossed that line.

For Palestinian Arabs though, fantasy politics, is a way of life and they are good at it. Palestinian wingnut Linda Sarsour admits everyone considered her white growing up in New York City, so she started wearing a hijab and insisting she was “of color” as a basic element of her political schtick. This play-pretend has some really determined hucksters pushing it.

Still, what I am hoping is one of these phony women of color could follow Elizabeth Warren, and out herself with a classic entry in an ethnic cookbook. Warren’s “Pow Wow Chow” recipe for that old Cherokee favorite -- Crab Omelet with Mayonnaise -- pretty much put the kibosh on her nonwhite bona fides. Perhaps there is another cookbook out there somewhere; say “Gaza Goodies,” where Ms. Tlaib tells us exactly how much mayo you put on your Wonder Bread when making a falafel sandwich. Until then, the Arab minstrel show may go on.
 
JULY 22, 2019
Trump was right all along about Puerto Rico, with protests blowing apart Democrats' hurricane narrative
By Monica Showalter
Democrats have cynically dined out for years on the false narrative that President Trump was always trying to hold down Puerto Rico.

Taking a page from the number they did on President Bush in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, they claimed that the U.S. territory, ravaged as it was by Hurricane Maria in 2017, was intentionally not getting the aid it needed, all because Trump was a racist who hated them. Remember this dreck from Democratic Party standard-bearer, Hillary Clinton, who said she wasn't sure President Trump actually knew that Puerto Ricans are citizens? This is an actual narrative from Democrats.com themselves, and it snapped into place the moment the hurricane touched down in 2017.

Clinton's actually still at it:

It can't be emphasized too much how Democrats have tried to push this narrative. Remember this? The big Democrat shindig that took place in Puerto Rico to highlight Trump's supposed badness about helping the island — which happened at a time when the government was in a shutdown?

SAN JUAN, P.R. — It had been planned for months: the largest-ever congressional delegation to Puerto Rico. It would start with briefings on the continuing effects of Hurricane Maria, end with a charity performance of "Hamilton" and include a little down time on the beach.

And then the government shut down.

As they returned to Washington for Monday night votes, the 39 members of Congress who traveled to Puerto Rico over the weekend were taking fire from Fox News, President Trump's communications team and the president himself.

The White House seized on the idea of Democrats "partying on the beach instead of negotiating," as polls have found most voters blaming Trump for the 24-day impasse over funding the federal government, the longest shutdown in history.

Trump tried to highlight that the local Puerto Rican government, loaded as it was with Trump-hating leftists, was the reason the aid wasn't getting through. Trump sent aid swiftly and was angry that it sat on the docks as Puerto Rican leftist pols postured for the press. Remember how San Juan's leftist mayor cried all those crocodile tears against Trump as the press fawned and Democrats claimed her as their own? Yet Trump said the aid was there, and it generally just went to waste, all because Puerto Rican officials — with weird ties to the Clinton machine, by the way — couldn't lay off the corruption for just a few weeks.
 
The Washington Examiner, a newspaper of sorts usually having its nose firmly planted between t's buttcheeks, has just published an article critical of his wall-building effort titled "Trump has not built a single mile of new border fence after 30 months in office". The WH press office is not pleased.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...of-new-border-fence-after-30-months-in-office

In a statement last week, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the federal agency overseeing border barrier construction, confirmed that all the fencing completed since Trump took office is "in place of dilapidated designs" because the existing fence was in need of replacement.

The agency said that it had built 51 miles of steel bollard fence with funding that was set aside during fiscal 2017 and 2018. But while the funding was meant both to replace outdated walls and to place barriers where there previously had been none, the government has only completed the replacement projects. The projects to secure areas with no fence are still in the works.​
 
Jerry Nadler is Going to Have a Meltdown When He Finds Out Mueller Requested Barr Limit His Testimony
Katie Pavlich | Jul 23, 2019 7:25 PM
d8e7c156-de94-4b08-8532-9187c6240598.png


Yesterday the Department of Justicesent a letter to Special Counsel Robert Mueller informing him it is appropriate to stay within the boundaries of his 448 page report during testimony on Capitol Hill Wednesday morning.

"Please note that there should be no testimony concerning the redacted portions of the public version of the report, which may not be disclosed because of applicable laws, court rules and orders," the letter states. "Any testimony must remain within the boundaries of your public report because matters within the scope of your investigation were covered by executive privilege, including information protected by law enforcement, deliberative process, attorney work product, and presidential communications privileges. These privileges would include discussion about investigative steps or decisions made during your investigation not otherwise descried in the public version of your report. Consistent with standard practice, Department witnesses should decline to address potentially privileged matters, thus affording the Department the full opportunity at a later date to consider particular questions and possible accomodations that may fulfill the committees' legitimate need for information while protecting Executive Branch confidentiality interests."

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler accused the Department of Justice of trying to limit Mueller's remarks and argued the letter should be ignored

Attorney General Bill Barr told Fox News on Tuesday that it was former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team who asked the Justice Department to send Mueller a letter telling him to keep his upcoming testimony to House lawmakers "within the boundaries" of the public version of his Russia probe report.

The letter provoked criticism from Democrats ahead of Wednesday’s highly anticipated hearing, with House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler calling it “incredibly arrogant.” Asked by Fox News why the Monday letter was sent, Barr said Mueller’s staff asked the department for guidance ahead of the hearing.

Mueller's testimony starts Wednesday morning at 8:30 am.
 
2015 Rashida Tlaib on Donald Trump After Travel Ban Rollout: ‘Deport This Asshole!’
Rashida-Tlaib-Asshole-640x480.jpg

Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images
MATTHEW BOYLE23 Jul 2019Washington, D.C.5,741
3:00
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), in 2015, called for the deportation of then-presidential candidate Donald Trump.

In response to Trump rolling out his travel ban idea in December 2015, a version of which he would later successfully implement as president despite legal challenges, Tlaib said on Twitter: “Deport this asshole!”
 
Sheriff Joe said:
Jerry Nadler is Going to Have a Meltdown When He Finds Out Mueller Requested Barr Limit His Testimony
Katie Pavlich | Jul 23, 2019 7:25 PM
d8e7c156-de94-4b08-8532-9187c6240598.png


Yesterday the Department of Justicesent a letter to Special Counsel Robert Mueller informing him it is appropriate to stay within the boundaries of his 448 page report during testimony on Capitol Hill Wednesday morning.

"Please note that there should be no testimony concerning the redacted portions of the public version of the report, which may not be disclosed because of applicable laws, court rules and orders," the letter states. "Any testimony must remain within the boundaries of your public report because matters within the scope of your investigation were covered by executive privilege, including information protected by law enforcement, deliberative process, attorney work product, and presidential communications privileges. These privileges would include discussion about investigative steps or decisions made during your investigation not otherwise descried in the public version of your report. Consistent with standard practice, Department witnesses should decline to address potentially privileged matters, thus affording the Department the full opportunity at a later date to consider particular questions and possible accomodations that may fulfill the committees' legitimate need for information while protecting Executive Branch confidentiality interests."

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler accused the Department of Justice of trying to limit Mueller's remarks and argued the letter should be ignored

Attorney General Bill Barr told Fox News on Tuesday that it was former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team who asked the Justice Department to send Mueller a letter telling him to keep his upcoming testimony to House lawmakers "within the boundaries" of the public version of his Russia probe report.

The letter provoked criticism from Democrats ahead of Wednesday’s highly anticipated hearing, with House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler calling it “incredibly arrogant.” Asked by Fox News why the Monday letter was sent, Barr said Mueller’s staff asked the department for guidance ahead of the hearing.

Mueller's testimony starts Wednesday morning at 8:30 am.
Click to expand...
Mueller already seems a bit annoyed. Lol! Nadlerʻs obsequiousness is.......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top