Thursday, January 2, 2020

BREAKING: Iranian Revolutionary Guard Leader Qasem Soleimani, Other Pro-Iranian Leaders Taken Out In Strike Near U.S. Forces In Baghdad

 Article by Nick Arama in "RedState":
The late Quds Force chief Qassem Soleimani

Lot of things popping in Baghdad right now, and the facts are still emerging, so we’ll tell you what we know so far and update as more comes in.

There were missiles that hit at or near the Baghdad airport where there is a U.S and Iraqi counter terrorism force. 

Also hit was two SUVs on a service road near the airport. Several people were killed in SUV belonging to the Popular Mobilization Forces group, the pro-Iranian people who had a hand in the attack on the U.S. Embassy two days ago.


Ehab Al Obaidy @Ehab8Alobaidy
Rockets Strike 's , Choppers Spotted in Airspace. Three rockets landed on the edge of International Airport , causing explosions but no deaths or injuries, according to local reporters.

One person apparently confirmed dead was Mohammed Ridha who was seen outside the embassy during the attack. 


Steven nabil ✔ @thestevennabil
Reports are that Mohammed Ridha head of Protocol office in the PMF was accompanied by high value guests, their SUVs were hit directly inside of Baghdad Airport’s main road


The PMF is admitting that Ridha/Reda was killed. The reports are that Ridha may have been picking up high profile folks at the airport.

But the question is who were the “special guests” who were with him who apparently were also taken out in the strike?

Reports now coming in that one of the people in the car was a big hit – the IRGC head Qasem Soleimani, the man responsible for many American deaths. Soleimani is the military mastermind whom Secretary of State Mike Pompeo had deemed equally as dangerous as Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, who died in a strike by U.S.-led forces in October, according to Fox.



Steven nabil ✔ @thestevennabil
Major news coming out of Iraq : A direct hit results in the death of Abu Mahdi Al Muhandis and General Qassem Sulaimani (Iranian leader of Quds force) , their convoy coming out of Baghdad international Airport, we are awaiting an official press release to confirm from either side



Steven nabil ✔ @thestevennabil
Sulaimani is Iran’s second most powerful man, after Ayatollah Khamenai the leader of the Iranian Islamic revolution. He is in charge of the Iranian political, economical and military influence in the entire region. Lebanon, Iraq, Syria and Yemen and Gaza strip.

Iraqi state media reported that Soleimani and the deputy head of the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, were both killed in the attack. 


Charles Lister ✔ @Charles_Lister
Replying to @Charles_Lister
BREAKING - multiple reports coming from claiming that *both* Quds Force chief Qassem Soleimani & Deputy Abu Mahdi al-Mohandes were killed tonight in the [alleged US] drone strike outside Airport.

The PMF is blaming the U.S. and Israel for the strike, but the U.S. has not confirmed their involvement as yet. The PMF official admitted that seven people were killed in the strike. 

Soleimani is believed to have had a hand in directing the attack on the attack on the U.S. Embassy on Dec. 31. According to an Alhurra report, Soleimani had helped get a pro-Iranian head of security for the Green Zone installed specifically to help aid in such an attack. As we noted yesterday, this obviously would have had security implications for the future safety at the embassies.



Yashar Ali ✔ @yashar
Replying to @yashar
3. Soleimani is extraordinarily close to the Supreme Leader of Iran. Soleimani reports directly to the Supreme Leader, the Qods force is technically part of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps which also reports to the Supreme Leader.

He is more powerful than Iran's President



Yashar Ali ✔ @yashar
Replying to @yashar
4. If you want to understand how powerful Soleimani is all you have to look to is a text he sent to David Petraeus. This text is an extraordinary (yet unsurprising) display of power. Especially since Iran has an elected president and foreign minister.

View image on Twitter
 This is developing and we will update.

https://www.redstate.com/nick-arama/2020/01/02/breaking/

at

CNN Analyst Attacks Trump for Calling Embassy Response ‘The Anti-Benghazi,’ but Facts Prove Him Right



It was incredibly disgusting on Tuesday when some on the left and in media (is that redundant?) seemed to almost wish for a disaster or wish harm on Americans at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad if it could prove “Orange Man Bad.”

Many called it “Trump’s Benghazi” as though they were wishing for Americans to be killed. They still didn’t seem to get what made Benghazi such a scandal – not that an embassy was attacked, but all the lies surrounding it.

But President Donald Trump made it clear from the outset that this would not be another Benghazi.

Unlike Hillary Clinton who ignored threats and actual prior attacks, the Trump administration anticipated and most of the staff had already been evacuated.

From the beginning, Trump truthfully called the attack what it was. While media was calling the people “protesters,” even “mourners,” Trump said they were backed by Iran. He didn’t make up some phony story about a video or lie to the American public.

Then, he sent in an immediate response, with 100 Marines and Apache helicopters. People didn’t get killed waiting thirteen hours for anyone to respond.

So Trump noted in response to the Democrats and media who were saying it was his Benghazi, that in fact, it was the “anti-Benghazi.”


Most Americans would respond to that saying “thankfully!” or something to that effect, glad that our troops were on the ground to protect the embassy and its personnel.

But CNN analyst and Washington Post columnist Josh Rogin dropped this instead.


What kind of a response is that?

Trump didn’t say “mission accomplished,” but he is noting, appropriately, that it isn’t the same.


The president also showed a quick and force-appropriate response, protecting personnel of the embassy without igniting the situation further, not leaving people to die.

Because of that, no one was injured and the militia members have now withdrawn. The embassy is no longer under immediate threat.

Now, maybe that’s not “mission accomplished” because it’s still in a dangerous area with all kinds of threats. But it’s about as close as you’re going to get with the best possible result.

Which makes it as “anti-Benghazi” as you can get.


at

President Trump’s ‘Benghazi’ Has Ended Much Better Than Hillary Clinton’s Did


President Donald Trump stands in front of the media while talking about
the situation at the U.S. embassy in Baghdad, from his Mar-a-Lago property,
Tuesday, Dec. 31, 2019, in Palm Beach, Fla. (AP Photo/ Evan Vucci)

Day before yesterday, a lot of the media and nearly all of NeverTrump seemed to be actively cheering for the Iranian-owned militia that had invaded the US embassy compound in Baghdad to kill or take hostage the staff there. Here are RedState posts on that subject:

Some of the commentary made was shameful and disgusting even by the very low bar of behavior set by the left:


That’s right, a “veterans” group cheering about the possible death of Americans because #OrangeManBad.

Unlike the Obama Administration, President Trump did not dither and wait for the situation to spin out of control. A week prior to the event, the Administration ordered the evacuation of all nonessential personnel from Iraq. At the time this was portrayed as a result of the deteriorating security situation for US personnel but, in retrospect, it seems like there must have been intelligence that the Iranian-directed militias were considering targeting the US embassy. Just hours after the rent-a-mob appeared, President Trump ordered a quick reaction force of about 100 Marines and a pair of AH-64 Apache gunships to Baghdad. The Marines reinforced the existing embassy guard force, the Apaches sent a message to the crowd:



That evening, the immediate reaction force of the 82d Airborne Division, some 750 paratroopers, was wheels up and heading to the theater of operations.

Yesterday morning, the militias decided to pack it in:
Supporters of the Kataib Hezbollah militia who had spent the night camped outside the embassy began dismantling their tents and leaving the area, saying they had won a victory and would now seek the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq through the nation’s parliament.
Their retreat signaled a potential end to a crisis that had seen thousands of angry militia supporters attempt to storm the embassy on Monday, prompting the United States to send additional troop reinforcements to Iraq.

This is how things are done and it is a clear sign that professionals, not the Ben Rhodes story hour crew in the Obama National Security Council, are in charge. A major incident was prevented through prior planning, the US demonstrated that it will not hesitate to kill Iranian-hired militias when they kill Americans, the deployment of additional US forces to the US embassy was timely and the measured response told the militias that it was time to wind their street theater down, and we avoided the public affairs disasters of either a US embassy being sacked and Americans killed and taken hostage or US troops stacking up dead, unarmed demonstrators inside the embassy compound.

The next time people make snide remarks about wanting adults to be in charge, you can remind them that they are.

at

The New York Times Continues to Shill for the Mullahs to Own the Orange Man



The siege of the U.S. Iraqi Embassy has ended, with the Iranian militias finally dispersing in the face of 100 Marines and Apache helicopters loitering overhead. No one was hurt and the embassy was secured without being breached. Despite ridiculous comparisons by some, this was nothing like Benghazi and actually showed how effective an immediate show of force can be. That was something Americans were denied by the Obama administration as they were left to die in 2012.

Despite the relatively positive outcome of this latest ordeal, the media still has to do their thing. Most have spent the last 24 hours describing the attackers as “protestors” despite the fact that they are clearly organized, Iranian led militias. You can see my recent post on the matter for ample proof of that (see Overwhelming Proof Emerges that Iran Is Behind the Attack On the U.S. Embassy In Iraq).

Now, perhaps some of these legacy outlets made a mistake early on? But that seems unlikely since they are still doing the same thing this morning.


Protestors don’t fly Hezbollah flags, chant their allegiance to the Mullahs, and try to kill Americans. People who do those things are generally called terrorists, but for whatever reason, these mainstream outlets are terrified to call a spade a spade.

But The New York Times decided to take the cake earlier today with this hottest of hot takes.


Why is this particularly egregious? Because the Times is attempting to conflate these violent militias with peaceful Iraqi protestors. Worse, those same militias were actually responsible for massacring those same peaceful protestors just a month prior. Why? Because most Iraqis want Iran’s influence out of their country and the Iranian proxies didn’t take too kindly to that notion. It’s been those backing the Mullahs who have actually murdered people for protesting Iran’s actions.

But the Times is so desperate to try to spin this as an “orange man screwed it all up” story that they are pretending the embassy attackers are the same formerly peaceful protestors. That’s a completely false presentation of the situation and spits on the deaths of those who were standing against the Iranian regime’s tyranny.

This is hardly the first example of the Times covering itself in glory during the standoff.


The Times also pushed the false narrative that this embassy attack was in response to actions by Trump, namely him ordering a retaliatory airstrike. In reality, the attack had been building for months, with numerous calls from Iran to attack the facility.

There’s only so much outrage to give over something like this, as it’s par for the course for our press corps. But you’d think a foreign military action involving Americans being at risk would bring a little levity to their coverage. Instead, it’s still orange man bad at all times, facts be damned. If that means parroting the Mullahs and covering for Iranian terrorists, then so be it in their minds. It’s pretty disgusting stuff.

At this point, is it really outrageous to accuse these outlets of being enemies of the people? I know that language from Trump leads to gnashing of teeth among a certain sect, but when it reaches the level of shilling for a violent terrorist regime, perhaps the label is warranted?

at

New FOIA Documents Reveal Details of McCabe Lying to FBI Investigators



Government watchdog group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), recently obtained documents requested in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the FBI. The records relate to the termination of former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.

Although CREW claims to be a non-partisan group, a glance at their activities suggests the opposite. They appear to disproportionately target Republicans and conservative-leaning groups. That is to say, the purpose of their FOIA request was made to find information that would help McCabe in his wrongful termination lawsuit, specifically to prove that McCabe’s firing did not follow standard agency procedures. (They did not intend to dig up dirt on him.) After reviewing the new documents, CREW contends that, although FBI internal rules require senior officials be given no less than 30 days notice before being terminated, McCabe was informed just eight days before his firing.

At any rate, included in the records are the transcripts of FBI agents’ interviews with McCabe in May and August 2017. The transcripts show that McCabe lied to them in May and when his lie was brought up again in August, he admitted it and “showed remorse.”

On May 9, 2017, the same day that former FBI Director James Comey was fired, agents interviewed McCabe about a Wall Street Journal article published shortly before the 2016 election. The article was “about an FBI investigation involving then-candidate Hillary Clinton, describing internal discussions among senior FBI officials.” He told the agents he had no idea who had leaked the story.

According to the Daily Beast, “a few months later, his story changed after he reviewed his answer.”

The Daily Beast reports:
The investigator said that “things had suddenly changed 180 degrees with this.” The interviewers stopped taking notes on what McCabe was saying, and the agent indicated their view of McCabe had changed: He was no longer a witness or victim. “In our business, we stop and say, look, now we’re getting into an area for due process,” the agent said.
But the agent said that the team did not raise that line of thought with McCabe. “I was very careful to say… with all due respect, this is what you told us. This has caused us some kind of, you know, sidetracking here now with some information other people have told us.”
The agent’s next comments to McCabe took on a frustrated tone.
“I remember saying to him, at, I said, sir, you understand that we’ve put a lot of work into this based on what you told us,” the agent said. “I mean, and I even said, long nights and weekends working on this, trying to find out who amongst your ranks of trusted people would, would do something like that. And he kind of just looked down, kind of nodded, and said yeah I’m sorry.”

Michael R. Bromwich, then-counsel for McCabe, has said “his story changed because in the initial interview he wasn’t prepared for the question. The question surprised him, and he didn’t give his answer a second thought because Comey was fired shortly after the interview concluded and his world turned upside down.”

That defense only goes so far. It’s understandable that McCabe had been blindsided upon hearing of Comey’s firing and being thrust into the position of Acting FBI Director. But chaos doesn’t last forever, and life returns to equilibrium, perhaps not an equilibrium that one is happy with or gets used to, but still relative calm returns. Certainly, within a month, McCabe should have spoken up about his false statement.

But this was not the only lie McCabe had told.

Eclipsing his lie to internal FBI examiners, were the multiple lies McCabe told to investigators on DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s team during their probe into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private server as Secretary of State. Horowitz rightly issued a criminal referral over those.

One final point – it’s funny how none of the people who witnessed first hand lies and wrongdoing on the part of high-level government officials were willing to blow the whistle.

at

Here’s What We All Know About the Media’s ‘Mistakes’



At the end of each year since the 2016 campaign, journalist Sharyl Atkisson updates and publishes a list of misleading or inaccurate stories published by the nation’s corporate media outlets. She recently published an updated version at the close of 2019, and it seems the Fourth Estate has been rather egregious over the past twelve months. But are these really mistakes? 

 For starters, we have the Covington Kids fiasco. Remember when news outlets like CNN rushed to report on the story of a group of apparently racist white kids harassing a poor, innocent Native American man in Washington D.C.? These supposed junior KKK members, sporting MAGA hats, were filmed viciously berating and mocking Nathan Phillips, a Vietnam veteran who just wanted to play his drum. In fact, Phillips told The Washington Post that the Nazis-in-Training “wouldn’t allow him to retreat.” 

 We know how that situation played out. The full video was released by the Black Hebrew Israelites who were actually responsible for starting the altercation in the first place. Only a few days later, the nation knew that it was Phillips who approached the kids while the Black Hebrew Israelites hurled racial and homophobic slurs at them. 

 Yes, there were some in the group of kids who made a mocking “tomahawk” gestures, which was not the best behavior. But overall, the children were not the aggressors in this story, nor did they react in a way that was inappropriate. Nevertheless, that did not stop the media from savaging them. Nick Sandmann became the primary target for committing the crime of standing in one place and smiling. Even worse, it was later revealed that Phillips was not a Vietnam veteran, nor did he claim to be. It appears The Washington Post put words in the man’s mouth. 

 Over the summer, MSNBC’s Lawrence O’ Donnell claimed that President Trump had loans with Russian co-signers. In a tweet that he later deleted, he wrote: “A source close to Deutsche Bank says Trump’s tax returns show he pays very little income tax and, more importantly, that his loans have Russian co-signers. If true, that explains every kind word Trump has ever said about Russia and Putin.”

 Well, that turned out to be about as true as Jussie Smollett’s hate crime claims. The anchor was forced to apologize for the “error” and take down the tweet. 

 In yet another effort to take down Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the media tried to pin another allegation of sexual impropriety on him. This one failed even more miserably than it did during his confirmation hearings. 

 The New York Times wrote a piece discussing information provided by attorney Max Stier who claimed that Kavanaugh had acted inappropriately at a drunken dorm party. 

 Supposedly, some friends pushed Kavanaugh’s genitals into the hand of a female student. 
This claim mirrored that of Deborah Ramirez, who made similar allegations against the judge. But the story quickly fell apart. when it was revealed that the female student in question denied the story to her friends, claiming that she did not recall any such behavior on Kavanaugh’s part and she refused to be interviewed for the article.

 These are only a few of the deceptive stories that the press has published this year. 

 Atkisson refers to these as “mistakes.” I must respectfully disagree with Mrs. Atkisson in her characterization of the establishment media’s reportage. These examples on her list are not mistakes, for the most part. Sure, there are situations in which journalists make honest human errors. But when you look at the totality of these misleading reports, it’s difficult to imagine that there is no agenda present. 

 There are currently 109 entries on Atkisson’s list and they all have one thing in common: Each erroneous story is politically damaging to President Trump and Republicans. Every single one works in the Democrats’ favor. If these were honest blunders, wouldn’t at least some of them make Trump look good when he didn’t deserve it? Of course they would and that, as they say, is the rub. 

 The media has been biased for decades — it is nothing new. But when Trump was elected in 2016, the corporate press dialed it up to 11, reporting blatantly false stories about the president and his supporters, knowing that they could deceive millions of people even if they have to issue retractions later. 

 Look at the “fine people” hoax, for example. Despite the fact that the story has been debunked and some outlets who originally reported it have admitted their claims were false, people still believe that the president said Nazis and white nationalists were “fine people” even though he clearly stated that he was not referring to these individuals. This is how powerful the media is — they can literally get millions of Americans to believe almost anything they want just by repeating the lie over and over again. 

 In some ways, this has backfired because now the American public — even those who don’t like Trump — no longer trusts the press. But this hasn’t stopped them yet and it is unlikely to do so in 2020. But will it be enough to bring about losses for the GOP? That remains to be seen. 

at

Virginia gun store says firearms, ammunition, and magazines flying off shelves with upswing in cash purchases


Article by Kerry Picket in "The Washington Examiner":


“This is the largest Christmas and November, December that we've had, basically, since Trump has come on board. The only other person that was a better salesman right now is when we had President Obama,” said Jerry Rapp, owner of SpecDive Tactical, in Alexandria, comparing the administrations of President Trump and his White House predecessor, Barack Obama.

“Every time [Obama] turned around he was going to ban something or make something illegal. But even that isn't even close to the amount of sales we're selling right now of magazines, of guns, of every kind of gun from pistol, rifle, shotguns, to AR platforms" and ammunition, Rapp told the Washington Examiner. "We can't keep it in stock.”

Since Democrats took the majorities of both chambers in Virginia’s state legislature after big wins in the November elections, gun control proposals that include bans on “assault-style” weapons, restrictions on magazine capacity, universal background checks, and restrictions to one gun a month purchases have all been brought forth.

Same at the federal level, with House Democrats entering their second year in the majority.
Virginia freshman Democratic Rep. Jennifer Wexton, who was previously a state senator, has proposed legislation in Congress to use credit card data to track gun purchases. The bill faces long odds on Capitol Hill. News about her idea has made it to Virginia firearms customers.

Rapp said his clients are increasingly concerned about privacy issues. Since the November elections, they've been purchasing with cash rather than credit cards.

Rapp, whose business includes gun safety training, says that some of the proposed legislation also affects his course instruction.

"From a gun place, the biggest [proposed legislation] that affects me right now, because we're a training company that sells guns, is if you are a trainer or if you train your son or daughter, that you could become a felon, but as a training place, we do safety," Rapp said. "We do training both from a basic pistol, rifle, shotgun to advanced combat shootings and tactical shootings for the military, law enforcement, three-letter agencies."

The National Rifle Association's lobbying arm released a statement Thursday responding to the upcoming gun control legislation fight in Richmond.

“Anti-gun billionaires who invested millions in the 2019 Virginia elections expect a return on that investment. While we mobilize our members and supporters to defeat Governor Northam’s political gun grab," said D.J. Spiker, NRA Institute for Legislative Action Virginia state director. "The NRA remains committed to working with those members of the General Assembly who are focused on finding real solutions to violent crime in Virginia.”

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/virginia-gun-store-says-firearms-ammunition-and-magazines-flying-off-the-shelves-upswing-on-buying-by-cash

 Image result for cartoons about gun control
at

No Hope for The Corn Pop Slayer?


Most CTH readers are aware the RNC and DNC are literally private clubs with the ability to do anything they want regarding rules & by-laws inside their respective organizations. 

As such both republicans and democrats can do whatever they want to determine their candidate. Understanding this opaque process was one of the cornerstones to figuring out how the RNC controlled the nominee outcome in 2012 and their failed attempt in 2016.

Here’s an interesting perspective on the likely DNC nominee looking at the procedural processes within the 2020 democrat national committee rule changes.  No super-delegates (in round one) and no winner-take-all rules for state delegation distribution.


Despite the challenges to scour through the details of party rules and regulations, it would be nice if more media spent time on this aspect of elections. Ultimately it is the club rules, and the candidate’s ability to use or overcome those rules, that is the best predictor of who will succeed in the nomination process.

at

President Trump Announces Delegation for Davos Worldwide Economic Forum Conference


The 2020 Davos economic conference will be a little more important to watch this year (as it was in 2017) due to the completed U.S. Trade Agreements (S Korea, Japan, Mexico, Canada, and China) and the predicted focus for the Trump administration to pivot from Asia to the EU and U.K. for the next critical phase of the ‘America-First’ global trade reset.


As a result of the recent U.K. election, pending Brexit, a favorable $7.5 billion WTO ruling and USTR Lighthizer’s new $2.4 billion EU targeted tariff program, the administration has significant advantages going into a trade discussion with the EU in 2020.

Team USA has the world’s strongest economy, the largest market, legally bolstered tariff authority and a quiver full of powerful economic arrows.

Meanwhile Team EU has: (1) the UK leaving; (2) severe drops in German industrial manufacturing; (3) a shrinking French economy; (4) yellow-vests in the streets; and (5) demands for greater economic autonomy from many key member states.

Overlay Germany, France and Italy large economy challenges such as: their promise to meet NATO obligations – and their attachment to the strangling Paris Climate Treaty, and the EU’s collective economic position is precarious at best.

WHITE HOUSE – Today, President Donald J. Trump announced the Presidential Delegation that will attend the World Economic Forum in Davos-Klosters, Switzerland, from January 20 to January 24, 2020.

The Honorable Steven Mnuchin, Secretary of the Treasury, will lead the delegation.

Members of the Presidential Delegation:

1. The Honorable Steven Mnuchin, Secretary of the Treasury (Lead)

2. The Honorable Wilbur Ross, Secretary of Commerce

3. The Honorable Eugene Scalia, Secretary of Labor

4. The Honorable Elaine Chao, Secretary of Transportation

5. The Honorable Robert Lighthizer, United States Trade Representative

6. The Honorable Keith Krach, Under Secretary for Growth, Energy and the Environment, Department of State

7. The Honorable Ivanka Trump, Assistant to the President and Advisor to the President

8. The Honorable Jared Kushner, Assistant to the President and Senior Advisor to the President

9. The Honorable Christopher Liddell, Assistant to the President and Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy Coordination.

at

Finally: A Democratic Congressman Admits the Dems Were Prepping for Impeachment Before Trump Was Even Elected



In politics, sometimes the obvious isn’t stated — not because it goes without saying, but because everybody’s lying.

But on Monday, huge impeachment fan Al Green admitted what many have believed but few have ‘fessed up to: Democrats were set to impeach the President before he was ever elected.

While speaking with MSNBC’s Chris Hayes, the two discussed, well, being full of crap.

Chris proposed:

“You just mentioned political expediency and insincerity. Those are two charges that have been leveled against Democrats during this entire affair, particularly since September when the formal impeachment inquiry started — and you play a starring role in those charges.”

He does indeed. Al called for impeachment from the House floor in October — of 2017.

It was his fourth time that year.

Chris is well aware:

“I mean, the argument goes like this of House Republicans and Trump and his allies: Basically, the Democrats wanted to impeach Donald Trump from day one. They cast about looking for a set of facts that they could plausibly use to do it, and all of it was pretextual and reverse-engineered to get to this point, and Exhibit One: Congressman Al Green, who [has] been calling for the man’s impeachment for two years now,” Hayes said. “What’s your response to that charge?”

I give you Honest Al. Here’s a quote to hold on to…

 Finally — someone actually says it:

“Well, the genesis of impeachment, to be very candid with you, was when the President was running for office.”

Wow.

Tolerance is a no-go:

“With those things in mind and with the President’s behavior before us — firing Mr. Comey who was investigating the intrusion of Russia into his campaign, our election — that was something that was not to be tolerated.”

And how about a little obstruction:

“And the President has continued to try to thwart the efforts of Congress to investigate with Mr. Mueller. The President, by and through his White House counsel, tried to get this done again to deal with Mr. Mueller, to extricate him, to remove him from the process.”

To Al, it’s all about doing his duty.

He had to keep that rascal Trump from claiming exoneration:

“More specifically, I said that the President would claim that he was exonerated if there were impeachable actions that he performed and we did not move to perform our duty to impeach him. He has distorted the truth. He has twisted it and tried to crush it to earth.”

Now here’s a quiz for ya. If you had to guess, what would you think Al Green has planned once impeachment is over?

Compliments of The Daily Wire, here it is:

Green has already suggested that he has no interest in trying to work with the administration to achieve anything for the American people because he is already thinking about impeaching Trump again in the future if Trump wins re-election.

Good government in action.

Green laid it out for C-SPAN almost a month ago:



Is the new job description for legislators “Paid Enemy of the Other Party”?

Why have a Congress if this is what it’s about?

How’d we end up with representatives whose open, expressed goal is to stymie the government from working?

More from C-SPAN:

“There is no limit on the number of times the Senate can vote to convict or not a President, no limit to the number of times the House can vote to impeach or not a president. So, my belief is that the speaker will probably say we’re going to move forward with what we have now, but we’re not going to end investigations and that there may be possible opportunities to do other things at a later time.”

As I covered previously, Al offered up a whole new reason for impeachment recently.

While speaking to MSNBC in December, the congressman claimed we need impeachment to address slavery:



After all, somehow, slavery produced Trump:

“I do believe, ma’am, that we have to deal with the original sin. We have to deal with slavery. Slavery was the thing that put all of what President Trump has done lately into motion. It’s insidious…racism. The President has played on racism, and he’s used that as a weapon to galvanize a base of support to mobilize people.”

Is this the way it’s gonna be for half a decade more? Will the voters allow it? Or, in an election yet to come, will America express its disapproval?

For now, Al Green will do his part to help us find out.

at

Secretary Pompeo Cancels Travel Plans to Remain Focused on Iraq Crisis



At the time of a Tuesday evening Fox News interview Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was affirming his trip to Ukraine was still planned.  However, by the time Pompeo woke up on Wednesday morning those plans were cancelled….  Perhaps someone told the secretary he needed to stay-attached to the crisis he helped inspire?

credit: sundance at CTH
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Wednesday postponed a trip to Ukraine so he could focus on the situation in Iraq after demonstrators attacked the U.S. embassy.
Supporters of Iranian-backed Iraqi paramilitary groups stormed the U.S. embassy’s perimeter and hurled rocks in two days of protests. They withdrew on Wednesday after Washington dispatched extra troops and threatened reprisals against Tehran.
Pompeo postponed his trip to Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Cyprus “due to the need for the Secretary to be in Washington, D.C., to continue monitoring the ongoing situation in Iraq and ensure the safety and security of Americans in the Middle East,” State Department spokeswoman Morgan Ortagus said in a statement.
On Tuesday evening Pompeo had told Fox News the Ukraine trip was still on… (read more)


Note the sequencing:

♦ First call to the Muslim Brotherhood (Qatar).  Influence agents.

♦ Second call to the irrelevant hostage (Iraq).  The pawns.

♦ Third call to the regional beneficiary (Israel).  The ally.

Watching…


at