Monday, August 26, 2019

Bill Barr’s Test – U.S. Attorney Jessie Liu Punts McCabe Indictment Decision Back to Main Justice

 
All of our prior research into the DC U.S. Attorney’s office, specifically toward Jessie Liu, has identified her as -essentially- Rod Rosenstein in a skirt.  Attorney Liu’s DC office was responsible for not prosecuting the Awan Brothers; and also Liu’s office was responsible for covering up the leaking of the classified FISA application by SSCI Director of Security James Wolfe. Yes, covering it up – there is ZERO DOUBT.
Both cases were clear law-breaking, and both highly politically charged.
Today the Times is reporting on leaks from officials connected to the DC office of Ms. Liu, framing her deference of the McCabe indictment back to Main Justice.
Two former DC prosecutors who were involved in the McCabe decision are mentioned by name in the NYT reporting: former lead prosecutor Ms. Kamil Shields, and also former prosecutor David Kent.  It would be interesting to see if Shields and/or Kent were also involved in the Awan case or the James Wolfe case.
Here’s the substance of the NYT article [emphasis and names added by me]:
WASHINGTON — Federal prosecutors in Washington appear to be in the final stages of deciding whether to indict Andrew G. McCabe, the former deputy F.B.I. director and a frequent target of President Trump, on charges  of lying to federal agents, according to interviews with people familiar with recent developments in the investigation.
In two meetings last week, Mr. McCabe’s lawyers met with the deputy attorney general, Jeffrey A. Rosen, who is expected to be involved in the decision about whether to prosecute, and for more than an hour with the United States attorney for the District of Columbia, Jessie K. Liu, according to a person familiar with the meetings. The person would not detail the discussions, but defense lawyers typically meet with top law enforcement officials to try to persuade them not to indict their client if they failed to get line prosecutors to drop the case.
But prosecutors may face headwinds if a case were to go to trial. One prosecutor quit the case [Ms. Shields] and has expressed frustration with how it was being managed, according to person familiar with her departure, and a key witness [Ms. Lisa Page] provided testimony to the grand jury that could hurt the government’s case.
Additionally, Washington juries are typically liberal, and prosecutors could end up with jurors sympathetic to Mr. McCabe who believe that he, not the president, is the victim of a political witch hunt. Mr. McCabe’s lawyers would probably emphasize his long history at the F.B.I. and his role protecting the country.
[…] Though the meetings between Mr. McCabe’s lawyers and top law enforcement officials suggest that prosecutors seem intent on moving forward with the case, they could also decide to pass on an indictment. Spokeswomen for the Justice Department, the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia and for Mr. McCabe all declined to comment.
[…] what should have been a seemingly straightforward case with a limited  number of witnesses and facts has dragged out amid internal deliberations. It has been under investigation for so long that the term expired for the grand jury hearing evidence. One of the lead prosecutors, Kamil Shields, was unhappy with the lengthy decision-making process and has since left the Justice Department for private practice. Ms. Shields declined to comment.
Another prosecutor, David Kent, also left the case recently. It is not clear why he departed but it would be an unusual move if prosecutors were indeed planning to charge Mr. McCabe. (read more)
CTH must point out – this scenario as described is exactly what our research identified when we posted the previously controversial outline of Jessie Liu.  [SEE HERE]
The tiered justice system in/around Washington DC is based on politics, who you know, and who might possibly be collateral damage if the law was indeed enforced as written.  This reality highlights the two-tiered justice system that has infuriated so many Americans as we have watched people in/around DC escape accountability. [More HERE]
As a reminder, here is the April 2018 Inspector General Report on Andrew McCabe which included a criminal referral for McCabe for lying to investigators:


….The problem for Attorney General Bill Barr is not investigating what we don’t know, but rather navigating through what ‘We The People’ are already aware of…. (more) 


at

Their Rules:

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2019/08/26/their-rules-n2552175 


Their Rules: Conservatives Set to Expose Leftist Journalists as Hypocritical Activists



Their Rules: Conservatives Set to Expose Leftist Journalists as Hypocritical Activists
Over the weekend the New York Times reported on a new effort being undertaken by conservative activists against leftist members of the "mainstream" media.
"New front in the war on the press"? What?
Members of the press have indignantly paraded around for years as "objective" seekers of truth with no political agenda. That's a lie. One look at their Twitter and other social media feeds prove many of them are firmly planted on the left and regularly use their media platforms to advocate for leftist causes. They've actively worked to destroy conservative opponents. They've painted conservatives as racist, xenophobic and anti-Semitic cancers that must be eliminated. Further, these people have been going after conservatives and their families for years: tea party members, the Covington Catholic schoolboys, Brett Kavanaugh, Trump supporters, etc.
The people we spoke to, we interviewed them for the story, kind of uncovering the depth of this here told us that their template was Media Matters and kind of this exhaustive — basically what’s called opposition research that people do all the time.”
But it turns out, most of the moral preening has been projection. Just last week an editor for the New York Times was exposed for a series anti-Semitic and racist tweets between 2008 and 2010. MSNBC's Joy Reid filed a false report with the FBI after anti-Semitic and anti-gay comments resurfaced from her blog.
The complaints aren't going over well and have received little sympathy.
I'll leave you with this: 
at

NY Times journos brace..

https://www.bizpacreview.com/2019/08/26/stunned-ny-times-journos-brace-for-media-war-as-conservatives-finally-turn-the-tables-796269

NY Times journos brace for media war as Conservatives finally turn tables

August 26, 2019  
Journalists at The New York Times were mocked for a report revealing that conservative allies of President Donald Trump are allegedly collecting negative information on media critics to use against them.
New York Times publisher A.G. Sulzberger declared that the publication will not be “intimidated or silenced” by the apparent group of conservative operatives compiling “dossiers of potentially embarrassing social media posts and other public statements by hundreds of people,” according to a report in The New York Times published Sunday.


(Image: Wikimedia)

The article by reporters Jeremy Peters and Ken Vogel characterized the effort as a “war on the press” and the “latest step in a long-running effort” by Trump and his allies to “undercut the influence of legitimate news reporting.”
The report claimed that the “operation has compiled social media posts from Twitter, Facebook and Instagram, and stored images of the posts that can be publicized even if the user deletes them.” Potentially “fireable” information on “several hundred” journalists has also been uncovered, including information on journalists’ families, according to one source.
The report also claimed that “only a fraction” of the information has been released like that on journalists at CNN, the Times and the Washington Post, but more will be uncovered as the 2020 election campaign gets into full swing. The White House and the Trump campaign reportedly told the Times they were not aware of or involved in the so-called operation.
“We know nothing about this, but it’s clear that the media has a lot of work to do to clean up its own house,” Tim Murtaugh, communications director of Trump’s 2020 re-election campaign, told the Times.
“Two can play at this game,” Sam Nunberg, Trump’s 2016 campaign advisor, said. “The media has long targeted Republicans with deep dives into their social media, looking to caricature all conservatives and Trump voters as racists.”
New York Times editor, Tom Wright-Piersanti, recently issued an apology after Breitbart News uncovered several anti-Semitic and racist tweets from a decade ago.
“I have deleted tweets from a decade ago that are offensive. I am deeply sorry,” the editor, who was demoted last week for the controversial remarks, tweeted.
In the Sunday Times report, Vogel and Peters claimed that materials that have been published on journalists have been, at times, “stripped of context or presented in misleading ways,” yet they  “proved authentic, and much of it has been professionally harmful to its targets.”
Sulzberger slammed the so-called operation in a statement printed by the publication.
“They are seeking to harass and embarrass anyone affiliated with the leading news organizations that are asking tough questions and bringing uncomfortable truths to light,” Sulzberger said. “The goal of this campaign is clearly to intimidate journalists from doing their job, which includes serving as a check on power and exposing wrongdoing when it occurs. The Times will not be intimidated or silenced.”
“Their goal is to silence critics and undermine the public’s faith in independent journalism,” he added. “This represents an escalation of an ongoing campaign against the free press.”
The Washington Examiner’s Seth Mandel reacted to the press meltdown in a series of tweets, noting that “what these reporters are calling a ‘war on the press’ is an admission they’ve been waging this war for years.”
“Companies are to blame too. How many ppl got fired over an old dumb joke, or something out of context, or something the person clearly no longer believes?” Mandel tweeted. “Stop inviting twitter trolls to run your HR for you and life will be better for everyone.”
Others on Twitter found the Times outrage humorous and another example of the left’s hypocrisy.
“Take a Xanax for your TDS [Trump Derangement Syndrome] next time,” environmental author Michael Shellenberger tweeted.

at

Trump Supporter Attacked... Again

Man says he was assaulted outside Portland bar for wearing 'MAGA' hat; two people arrested


Reporter Zach Anders





  •  
  • PORTLAND, OR (KPTV) - Portland police say a man and woman were arrested early Saturday morning for assault, and the man who was attack says it's all because of his "Make America Great Again" hat.
  • At around 12:50 a.m., officers responded to the report of a disturbance at the Growler's Taproom, located in the 3300 block of Southeast Hawthorne Boulevard.
    Lenzner told FOX 12 that he and his wife were on a date night. He said right when they got there, they were attacked outside the patio by people upset about the hat.
    "I got mobbed by everybody that was in that bar outside. People came from the inside out - just circled me and my wife," said Lenzner.
    Security camera footage provided by the bar shows the couple did try and make their way in, but it doesn't appear to be very busy. In fact, bar staff say they were already done serving for the night and that they told the couple they were closing.
    Lenzner attests that things escalated between people outside the bar. That's when police say 22-year-old Leopold A. Hauser and 23-year-old Adebisi A. Okuneye assaulted Lenzner and his wife.
    "Surrounding me, like literally surrounding me, pushing me. I'm just trying to get through, trying to stop the person from hitting me, from taking my hat, and then I get sucker punched," Lenzner told FOX 12.
    Hauser and Okuneye had left before police arrived, but Lenzner was able to give them a license plate number.
    The suspects were arrested a few blocks away.
    Both Hauser and Okuneye were booked into the Multnomah County Detention Center on charges of third-degree assault. They are expected to be arraigned Monday.
    Witnesses, including the bartender, say Lenzner was the one who started it. In security footage, he can be seen pointing to his hat and saying something as he left, and witnesses say that's what started it all.
    Police say Lenzner never involved himself physically in the altercation.
  • At the scene, officers located Luke Lenzner with injuries to his face.

    • at

    Get Ready For Apocalypse Ruth



    Progressives’ ghoulish glee over the death of an old man turned into barely constrained panic when, later that day, it was revealed that their heroine Ruth Bader Ginsberg was just treated for pancreatic cancer yet again. Their disgraceful joy at David Koch’s passing was yet another reminder of the harsh truth that leftists want you dead or enslaved. Koch’s sin was that he disagreed with liberals (though, in important ways, also with conservatives). For that, these cretins danced around like idiots celebrating his succumbing. And they’ll celebrate when you die too. Always believe people who tell you they hate you and want you dead.

    Oh, and never disarm.

    Of course, RBG is eager to disarm you, and she would have gotten away with it too if it weren’t for those meddling Supreme Court kids who actually read Second Amendment. Her constitutional jurisprudence consists of disregarding what she dislikes that’s in the Bill of Rights and making up stuff that’s not in it but that she feels – not thinks, feels – should be in it. She’s a terrible justice and conservatives would love to see her step down. But our side expressed no delight in her latest suffering comparable to the giddy revelry that greeted Koch’s kicking the bucket. We’re not monsters, though how long that remains true is up in the air. When you establish New Rules they tend to come back and bite you on the Schumer. 

    Here’s a pro tip, liberal dummies. If you are going to normalize the hatred of political opponents and express open joy at their demise, the savvy play is to be the political faction that possesses and knows how to use AR-15s and not the one that agonizes over its pronouns. 

    RBG’s latest successful MMA bout with the Grim Reaper is a reminder that we conservatives need to gird our loins for what’s coming when she finally leaves the Supreme Court for good. But our anticipatory loin girding is merely prudent preparation.  

    In fact, most of us feel a grudging respect for Ginsburg as a worthy opponent and as one tough cookie. She’s like John McCain with a neck doily; he drove us up the wall too, but as a group we did not wish cancer on him.

    Not wanting her to die a horrible death is not to sugarcoat the damage she has done with her utterly upside-down vision of our founding document, but to simply reaffirm a point that never should have been an issue but is an issue because of the shameful behavior of liberals like we saw with Koch. We conservatives don’t want people to die simply because they have different political beliefs. 

    But she’s very old and she’s very sick and facing that reality is not the same as high-fiving it. There’s a more than significant chance that before the 2020 election she will pass on to her reward despite her being the Energizer Bunny of being wrong wrong wrong about constitutional jurisprudence. She just keeps going and going and going, but someday she’s going to run out of juice and join her pal Antonin Scalia on the bench in the great beyond, and if that happens with Trump in the White House, ho boy.

    You can relive the shameful saga of the Brett Kavanaugh hearings in Mollie Hemingway and Carrie Severino’s remarkable Justice on Trial. What will happen next time will pale in comparison. If you thought you saw frothy, mouth-foaming insanity last time -- just you wait.

    The elite’s message will combine “Trump is illegitimate” with “Cocaine Mitch is breaking precedent” and “They’re going to bring back slavery when they establish The Handmaid’s Tale as the law of the land” with a bit of “This will shred the fabric of the nation we love so much that we support jerks who kneel during the National Anthem.” 

    The Democrats are already prepping the battlespace with this cheesy narrative. Obama’s brain David Axelrod tweeted: “If there is a SCOTUS vacancy next year and @senatemajldr carries through on his extraordinary promise to fill it-despite his own previous precedent in blocking Garland-it will tear this country apart.” I responded to this tweet by observing – employing terms that were a bit salty and therefore shall not be linked – that the last time Democrats failed to get their way and tore the country apart, we patriots (paraphrasing) handily defeated them. But hey Dems, maybe the second time’s the charm!

    It’s not worth the time to dissect the wrong premise about confirming justices during an election year in Axelrod’s wrong tweet. Liberals are disinterested in argument, and the Murder Turtle running the Senate gets this and won’t even play their game. This is about power. On an objective level, perhaps Justice Ginsburg should step down, but she has the power not to and therefore it’s silly to whine about her not doing it. Similarly, we have the power to shove a new conservative Supreme Court justice down the Dems’ throats, so it’s silly to argue with the libs about it (though our objective case for doing it is strong). After a short and dignified interregnum, once the impending RBG vacancy becomes actively vacant, Donald Trump should unashamedly use the power of the office he was elected to and nominate a replacement, and Moscow Mitch should start rushin’ toward confirming him – or her.

    The fact is that soon we’re going to have six conservatives on SCOTUS, or actually, five-and-a-half if you count Justice Soft Serve Roberts.

    And when this all goes down, the left will freak out in a festival of freaking outness unparalleled in American history. The Dem candidates will go nuts. Big Chief Warren will be on the warpath, Bernie will call for revolution, Harris will say whatever she thinks is useful, Biden will start talking about how JFK visited him in the White House, and Beto will continue to be a furry.

    We’ll get lots of the “Orange man bad, orange man not nominate a judge because he bad” babble from the libs and their gimp media. Maddow will cry, Don Lemon will pound an umbrella drink and Tater Stelter will sweat profusely as he reads off the teleprompter about how Trump is literally Hitler. The Fredocons will weigh in with their patented brand of sissy submission to their elite tops. We’ll be informed how taking back the Supreme Court like the geebos of Conservative, Inc., promised for three decades is actually not who we are and how we’re better than that and how oh well I never. Can you imagine Jeb! or Mitt in this situation? They would eagerly, whole-heartedly buy into the compromise unity candidate ploy to stick some moderate muggle on the bench in order to “repair the heart of our country” and “build bridges” of bipartisan love.

    Trump builds victories, and he’s going to blow up that bridge.

    My money is on him appointing Amy Coney Barrett, who has the unique ability to be a Scalia-like justice and to own the libs by being a woman. And not just any woman but a female woman who has kids and goes to church and is down with originalism like a boss. It’s going to be hard to paint her as the ringleader of a teen rape gang, and while her beer-appreciation status is yet unknown, it is unlikely she will have to explain to the dummies on the Judiciary Committee her high school clique’s unique flatulence euphemisms. 

    But they will still try to destroy her. That’s their only move, one not unrelated to the giddy cheer that greeted David Koch’s death. All we conservatives did with whoever Merrick Garland was was tell him “No.” But if you are conservative and you oppose them, they will try to wipe you out, if not literally then at least figuratively. But that’s a desperation tactic and it does not work, not if you hold strong and refuse to back down. Clarence Thomas fought back and won. Brett Kavanaugh fought back and won. And Amy Coney Barrett will fight back and she will win.

    And that means our Constitution will win.

    Loins, commence girding. 

    at

    Retired French Forum


    at

    Chinese Paper Tiger Crumbles

    China announces it seeks 'calm' end to trade war, as markets tank and currency hits 11-year flatline




    China signaled on Monday it was now seeking a "calm" end to its ongoing trade war with the U.S., as Asian markets crumbled and China's currency plummeted to an 11-year low following the latest tariffs on $550 billion in Chinese goods announced last Friday by the Trump administration.

    Trump said Monday that officials from China called U.S. officials and expressed interest to "get back to the table,” The Wall Street Journal reported. He called the discussions a “very positive development.”
    “They want to make a deal. That’s a great thing,” he said.
    News of the possible opening in negotiations came shortly after President Trump threatened to declare a national emergency that would result in American businesses freezing their relationships with China. Trump's tariff barrage on Friday was a response to China imposing its own retaliatory tariffs on $75 billion in U.S. goods.


     At the Group of Seven summit in France on Sunday, White House officials rejected suggestions the president was wavering and insisted that his only regret was not implementing even more tariffs on China. Trump wrote on Twitter that world leaders at the G-7 were "laughing" at all the inaccurate media coverage of the gathering.
    In response, Chinese Vice Premier Liu He told a state-controlled newspaper on Monday that "China is willing to resolve its trade dispute with the United States through calm negotiations and resolutely opposes the escalation of the conflict," Reuters first reported, citing a transcript of his remarks provided by the Chinese government. Liu is China's top trade negotiator.
    at

    First Lady Melania Trump Visits Basque Village of Espelette, Southern France, During G7 Outing…


    Frances’ First Lady Brigitte Macron took the spouses and partners of the G7 Summit leaders on a tour of a traditional Basque village near Biarritz, in the South of France.

    First Lady Melania Trump and the entourage visited the Village of Espelette, the flower gardens of Villa Arnaga and the church of Saint-Etienne while their spouses were holding meetings and discussions at the G7 summit.

    https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/08/25/first-lady-melania-trump-visits-basque-village-of-espelette-southern-france-during-g7-outing/
    at

    The 1519 Project: How Early Spanish Explorers Took Down A Mass-Murdering Indigenous Cult


    Five hundred years ago, Spanish explorer Hernando Cortez and his native allies helped put an end to a gruesome regime with one of the greatest underdog victories ever recorded.

    The New York Times officially announced its new 1619 Project to “to reframe the country’s history, understanding 1619 as our true founding, and placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of the story we tell ourselves about who we are.” Constantly now, Americans are called upon to reflect on European villains and indigenous victims. However, the story of European civilization reaching the North American continent did not begin with the first arrival of slave ships at Jamestown in 1619.

    Let’s take a brief recess from the 1619 Project to explore another project. Call it the “1519 Project.” A full century before The New York Times’ proposed re-dating of the American founding and 2,200 miles southwest of Jamestown, European contact sparked a native uprising against a gruesome cult of cannibalism and mass murder.

    Graphically described in the 1855 book, “Makers of History: Hernando Cortez,” John S.C. Abbott paints a picture of desperation for a tiny band of Spanish soldiers and their native allies. Next year marks the 500th anniversary of the Battle of the Dismal Night, where an initially successful Cortez was nearly crushed by superior Aztec forces.

    After being driven out of the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan, Cortez led a frantic, fighting retreat through the mountain passes. Cortez lost all his gunpowder and cannons while fleeing through the water surrounding the capital. Only 12 horses remained of his entire cavalry. Cortez told his historian, “of the twenty-four horses that remained to us, there was not one that could move briskly, nor a horseman able to raise his arm, nor a foot-soldier unhurt who could make any effort.”

    As Cortez retreated, he left intact the Aztec system of ritualistic mass murder. In his book, Abbott details the horrific acts of the Aztecs:
    At times, in the case of prisoners taken in war, the most horrid tortures were practiced before the bloody rite was terminated. When the gods seemed to frown, in dearth, or pestilence, or famine, large numbers of children were frequently offered in sacrifice. Thus the temples of Mexico were ever clotted with blood. Still more revolting is the well-authenticated fact that the body of the wretched victim thus sacrificed was often served up as a banquet, and was eaten with every accompaniment of festive rejoicing. It is estimated that from thirty to fifty thousand thus perished every year upon the altars of ancient Mexico.
    The Aztecs brutal system depended on a steady supply of prisoners of war and human children collected from the empire’s subjects as “taxes.” The scale of the murder one could find in just a single outlying Aztec city was astounding. Abbot relays, “they witnessed the most appalling indications of the horrid atrocities of pagan idolatry. They found, piled in order, as they judged, one hundred thousand skulls of human victims who had been offered in sacrifice to their gods.”

    Fear kept the blood running down the steps of the Aztec temples until, in 1519, Cortez landed and challenged the evil that had until then been unchallengeable. Before long, tens of thousands of natives flocked to join Cortez’s unwitting liberation movement. For a short while, he captured the fortified Aztec capital until being driven out by far superior forces.

    As he desperately tried to lead his men to safety, Cortez’s interpreter translated the taunts of the harassing Aztec forces: “Hurry along, robbers, hurry along; you will soon meet with the vengeance due to your crimes.” Then “the significance of this threat was soon made manifest. As the Spaniards were emerging from a narrow pass among the cliffs … they came suddenly upon an extended plain. Here to their amazement, they found an enormous army” arrayed against the few hundred Spaniards who had just limped into a final ambush. Abbot describes the Aztec forces as “a living ocean of armed men,” numbering 200,000 strong.

    Cornered, and out of options, Cortez decided to lead his men into a final, suicidal charge against the overwhelming odds. Cortez led his rag-tag forces in a frontal assault, mustering all the speed he could out of his wounded, exhausted, and starving forces.
    Before the Aztecs could drown them with superior numbers, Cortez’s forces reached the Aztec’s blood-red banner and he seized it. Cortez had fought enough battles with the Aztecs to recognize the banner was a sacred symbol of Aztec authority. With their banner gone, the Aztecs lost morale and panicked, breaking into disorganized chaos. With the chain of command destroyed, Cortez seized one of the most audacious military victories in human history.

    Cortez later recaptured the capital city. While Abbott acknowledges that human rights among the Spaniards of the 16th century “were but feebly discerned,” in contrast to the Aztecs, Cortez “treated all the prisoners he took very kindly, and liberated them with presents.” Cortez ended the grotesque practice of human sacrifice and, according to Abbott, “treated the vanquished natives with great courtesy and kindness.”

    Cortez was no saint. He lusted after women, gold, and adventure—so much he missed his first chance at battle due to injuries sustained after falling from a great height trying to sneak into the bedroom of a villager’s daughter. As Abbott concedes, his “love of plunder was a latent motive omnipotent in his soul, and he saw undreamed of wealth lavishly spread before him.”

    Cortez will never satisfy a 21st century standard of human rights, and may not even be an exemplary leader. Nor did he set out to liberate anyone. Yet, regardless of his motives in Mexico, the outcome must be conceded: Cortez toppled a mass-murdering cult with the assistance of the oppressed. 

    at