Title :
link :
WWW.MOEISSUESOFTHEDAY.BLOGSPOT. COM
Sat. Mar. 23, 2019
All Gave Some~Some Gave All
*****
Now that the witch hunt is over we turn to Peggy Lee for the real answer…
No More Indictments Coming From Robert Mueller, Undercutting Fake News Media, Democrat Party’s Trump-Russian Collusion Hoax
Attorney General Bill Barr on Jan. 29, 2019. (Andrew Harnik/AP Photo)
Read Attorney General Barr’s Letter Regarding the Mueller Report
BY JACK PHILLIPS
Attorney General Bill Barr issued a letter regarding the completion of special counsel Robert Mueller’s final report about alleged Russian interference into the 2016 presidential election.
Barr now has the option regarding how to disclose Mueller’s report to the public.
In the letter, he announced Mueller submitted his report to the Department of Justice on March 22.
Special Counsel Robert Mueller leaves following a meeting with members of the US Senate Judiciary Committee at the US Capitol on June 21, 2017. (Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images)
The attorney general’s letter reads as follows:
Dear Chairman Graham, Chairman Nadler, Ranking Member Feinstein, and Ranking Member Collins:
I write to notify you pursuant to 28 C.F.R. 600.9(a)(3) that Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III has concluded his investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election and related matters. In addition to this notification, the Special Counsel regulations require that I provide you with a “description and explanation of instances (if any) in which the Attorney General” or acting Attorney General “concluded that a proposed action by a Special Counsel was so in appropriate or unwarranted under established Departmental practices that it should not be pursued.” 28 C.F.R. 600.9(a)(3).
There were no such instances during the Special Counsel’s investigation.
The Special Counsel has submitted to me today a “confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions” he has reached, as required by 28 C.F.R. 600.8(c). I am reviewing the report and anticipate that I may be in a position to advise you of the Special Counsel’s principal conclusions as soon as this weekend.
Then-FBI Director Robert Mueller in Washington on June 25, 2008. Special Counsel Mueller is reportedly close to finishing his investigation. (Alex Wong/Getty Images)
Separately, I intend to consult with Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein and Special Counsel Mueller to determine what other information from the report can be released to Congress and the public consistent with the law, including the Special Counsel regulations, and the Department’s long-standing practices and policies. I remain committed to as much transparency as possible, and I will keep you informed as to the status of my review.
Finally, the Special Counsel regulations provide that “the Attorney General may determine that public release of” this notification “would be in the public interest.” 28 C.F.R. 600.9 (c). I have so determined, and I will disclose this letter to the public after delivering it to you.
Sincerely,
William P. Barr
Attorney General
The Beto Danger
by Deanna Fisher
Against all odds, Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke is an actual factor in the 2020 Democrat primaries.
After announcing the biggest opening day cash haul of all the current candidates, Beto is currently running in the top tier of candidates in the polls, behind Biden (who has still not formally announced), Sanders (who Beto beat in fundraising), and is pretty much in a statistical tie with Kamala Harris.
The question is: how? This was supposedly the year of the “intersectional candidate” (and even Team Biden is dropping heavy hints that he plans on getting ahead of the game by name-dropping Stacy Abrams as a potential vice-presidential running mate), so how is current non-office-holding Beto O’Rourke actually running near the top of the pack?
There are two lines of thought, and both can be true at the same time. One is a warning to Democrats, and the other is a warning to Republicans.
1) Beto may be an empty suit, but he’s a progressive empty suit in the Obama model.
The vagueness of Beto O’Rourke’s policy positions has allowed him to be whatever the Democrat faithful want him to be. This sounds an awful lot like what Barack Obama was like in 2008. He gave all the standard (at the time) Democratic lines, and he edged out Hillary Clinton on charm and likeability and intersectionality.
While the lack of substance is making socialists (who want Bernie) mad and confusing more liberal media (who want their juicy meaty soundbites), Beto’s aura of “I’m just a simple man trying to make my way in the universe” is drawing an outsized amount of money and attention.
This should concern the Democrat upper management at the DNC. They have shoved intersectionality and tribalism so far down the throat of their base that it might just be the bland, good-looking white skater dude who ends up outraising them all and ending up as the nominee, because everyone else is making a demand of some kind. Beto makes no demands, because Beto will be whatever makes YOU, the voter, happy. Dude.
Yes, he might have a shady past, an alleged history of digusting pranks, weird affectations, the inability to stay off furniture, and unanswered questions about dressing up in furry costumes, but he’s making Democrat voters feel validated while the other candidates are busy yelling at voters for the sins of their fathers or for their lack of caring (see: climate change and socialist money grabs). And right now (until Biden jumps in), he’s the only candidate actively trying to make voters feel good about themselves. Note to Democrats: THAT’S A WINNING STRATEGY.
2) We have seen this story before, on the Republican side.
Jim Geraghty of National Review sounded this warning today. Republicans, pay attention.
He’s a Texan, the son of a man prominent in state politics and an all-around success in life. The Texan grew up with alternating affection for and intermittent tension with his well-known, accomplished father, with the heavy question of how he would ever emerge from his father’s shadow. He went off to boarding and prep school on the East Coast, then on to the Ivy Leagues. Young adulthood was a surprisingly difficult time for a young man who grew up with so many advantages: too much partying, a sense of prolonged adolescence, hitting rock bottom with run-ins with the law after drinking too much and getting behind the wheel. Years later, people would ask if the family connections spared him the worst possible legal consequences of his reckless behavior in his younger years. But he met a woman from a good family, who works in education, and marriage and parenthood brought maturity and stability to his life — the bottle stopped becoming such an issue in his life.”
He eventually tried his hand at entrepreneurship, swearing he never wanted to be a politician like his father. But when an opportunity in Texas politics appeared, he took it, out-hustling a Democratic incumbent who had been far too confident about the voters’ mood on Election Day. Rivals and critics in both parties saw him as a servant of his donors, mixing business and government, capable of making a backroom real-estate deal sound like a public service aimed to help everyone. He talked a good game about controlling spending and reducing the size of government, but his instinct that government had a duty to help people usually won out in budget fights.”
He believed immigration brought great benefits to America, and that illegal immigrants should be treated with dignity and respect — and an opportunity to become a citizen if they had avoided serious legal trouble. His rivals saw a lightweight, coasting on charm and charisma and good humor, with limited serious thought about difficult issues. His wife was a great asset, although she had never been a huge fan of his political ambitions. She worried about how her husband’s political life would affect their children. The Texan was elected in a good year for his party and managed to get reelected in a year when the national winds were against his party. The national media descended upon Texas, writing about him and asking whether he was the future of the party.”
Then, surprisingly early in his political career, he chose to run for president. Despite having only been in a major office for six years, the Texan’s party saw great potential in him, and responded with a wave of donations. They were hungry for a winner. His party had experienced a shocking defeat to a president they deemed a national embarrassment and even illegitimate — a shameless, scandal-ridden womanizer up to his neck in crooked land deals and who lied as easily as he breathed. His boring vice president was regularly trotted out to tout the president’s virtues, and most members of the president’s party echoed his claims that the work of the special counsel was a partisan witch hunt.”
The Texan pledged he could restore America’s sense of pride. On the stump, he rarely went deep into policy specifics. He preferred to emphasize that America was better than the flaws of its current president, and that honor and dignity could return to the Oval Office. He wasn’t always the most eloquent, and sometimes he mangled his message. But a lot of the people who came to hear him speak came away convinced his heart was in the right place and he could restore their optimism in America’s future.”
That’s Beto O’Rourke. But that’s also George W. Bush.” (emphasis in the original)
Jim Geraghty ✔@jimgeraghty
… but the story of the Texan is also the story of _this guy_. http://bit.ly/2UNKRTL
Jim Geraghty ✔@jimgeraghty
A lot of fans of both men will absolutely hate the comparison. But the parallels are there: successful dads, youthful troubles with alcohol, maturing through marriage and fatherhood, charisma on the stump and critics calling each one an empty suit.http://bit.ly/2UNKRTL pic.twitter.com/DjqJv8faXW
And while one can argue that Beto is far, far behind Bush 43 in actual governing experience – both in the private sector (running a major league baseball franchise) and in the public sector (being a state governor) – the similarities involved should jolt the GOP out of their complacency. Treat Beto like a joke, and the last laugh may be on us.
There is danger in letting Beto O’Rourke continue on his merry, ambling way without any real challenge. Yes, he first has to run the Democrat primary gauntlet – and they are going to eat eachother alive. But I wouldn’t be surprised to see Beto surviving to the later rounds of that particular version of The Hunger Games. And the GOP had better take each candidate seriously, no matter how policy-light and empty-headed they may appear. Political experts know that their candidates are only human, but voters see a persona, not a person. And the more appealing the persona, the better the chance of coming out on top of the mountain at the end of the fight.
Attorney General Bill Barr on Jan. 29, 2019. (Andrew Harnik/AP Photo)
Read Attorney General Barr’s Letter Regarding Mueller Report
BY JACK PHILLIPS
Attorney General Bill Barr issued a letter regarding the completion of special counsel Robert Mueller’s final report about alleged Russian interference into the 2016 presidential election.
Barr now has the option regarding how to disclose Mueller’s report to the public.
In the letter, he announced Mueller submitted his report to the Department of Justice on March 22.
Special Counsel Robert Mueller leaves following a meeting with members of the US Senate Judiciary Committee at the US Capitol on June 21, 2017. (Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images)
The attorney general’s letter reads as follows:
Dear Chairman Graham, Chairman Nadler, Ranking Member Feinstein, and Ranking Member Collins:
I write to notify you pursuant to 28 C.F.R. 600.9(a)(3) that Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III has concluded his investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election and related matters. In addition to this notification, the Special Counsel regulations require that I provide you with a “description and explanation of instances (if any) in which the Attorney General” or acting Attorney General “concluded that a proposed action by a Special Counsel was so in appropriate or unwarranted under established Departmental practices that it should not be pursued.” 28 C.F.R. 600.9(a)(3).
There were no such instances during the Special Counsel’s investigation.
The Special Counsel has submitted to me today a “confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions” he has reached, as required by 28 C.F.R. 600.8(c). I am reviewing the report and anticipate that I may be in a position to advise you of the Special Counsel’s principal conclusions as soon as this weekend.
Then-FBI Director Robert Mueller in Washington on June 25, 2008. Special Counsel Mueller is reportedly close to finishing his investigation. (Alex Wong/Getty Images)
Separately, I intend to consult with Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein and Special Counsel Mueller to determine what other information from the report can be released to Congress and the public consistent with the law, including the Special Counsel regulations, and the Department’s long-standing practices and policies. I remain committed to as much transparency as possible, and I will keep you informed as to the status of my review.
Finally, the Special Counsel regulations provide that “the Attorney General may determine that public release of” this notification “would be in the public interest.” 28 C.F.R. 600.9 (c). I have so determined, and I will disclose this letter to the public after delivering it to you.
Sincerely,
William P. Barr,
Attorney General
EXCLUSIVE AUDIO: Shep Smith Accuser Says Fox News Host Sexually Attacked Him, Kept Going After He Tried To Push Him Off
By Patrick Howley
A man told his story to Big League Politics about an encounter with Fox News host Shep Smith in 2004 in New York City. The man describes how he woke up with Smith on top of him with his tongue down his throat, how he tried to push the Fox host off him, and how Smith lunged at him three or four more times while continuing to force the unwanted physical encounter.
In a revelatory interview with Neil McCabe for Big League Politics, John Doe #1, 35, says that Smith took advantage of him. Here is audio from the interview:
John Doe #1 says he met up with Smith at the now defunct Nation bar in Manhattan, a spot Smith used to frequent to play Golden Tee and hang out when he was not on the Fox airwaves.
“I wake up, and Shepard is on top of me, like, in a towel or a bathrobe. And he’s got his tongue down my throat and his hands all over me.
Completely uninvited. I mean, I gave him no signal. There was nothing,” John Doe #1 says in the interview — excerpts of which are presented in audio form above.
“I had also volunteered to sleep in the spare, so it wasn’t — I never invited myself to his bedroom,” John Doe #1 said.
“I pushed him off. I was like, ‘Dude what are you doing?’ And he’s like, ‘what you don’t like it?’ There was like this, kind of like No!, and he kept going, he kept pushing. Like, pushing his hands on all these spots,” John Doe #1 said.
“He was just on top of me,” John Doe #1 said, calling the experience “definitely shocking.” John Doe #1 noted that “he finally stopped, but it took a lot of — it wasn’t just an immediate no, and then everything was like, so sorry.”
John Doe #1 said that Shep Smith lunged at him “three or four more times” after the initial attack.
John Doe #1 noted another moment in the kitchen, while John Doe #1 was getting ready to leave, when Smith grabbed him and put his tongue down his throat after the initial incident.
Fox News has not responded to an inquiry for this report.
Got a hot news tip for us? Photos or video of a breaking story? Send your tips, photos and videos to tips@bigleaguepolitics.com. All hot tips are immediately forwarded to BLP Staff.
Have something to say? Send your own guest column or original reporting to submissions@bigleaguepolitics.com.
Top 10 Propagandists Who Pushed Russia Collusion Hoax
AP/Getty Images/YouTube KRISTINA WONG
Special Counsel Robert Mueller delivered his final report to Attorney General William Barr, marking the official end of the investigation — and with no further indictments on the way.
Although it is not yet known what is in the report, and it could still contain information damaging to the administration, the revelation that there will be no new indictments suggests that the Russia collusion theory is a bust.
Yet since the summer of 2016, there were countless pushers of the narrative that President Trump’s campaign had colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election, specifically by conspiring with Russia to steal and distribute stolen emails from the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman.
This included anonymous current and former officials and those in the media willing to publish their allegations, friends of those officials, Democrat members of Congress, those wanting to promote themselves, and of course, Clinton and her campaign officials.
Here are ten of the top promoters of the narrative:
-
CNN — CNN first reported that President Trump was briefed on the “pee dossier,” which prompted BuzzFeed to publish the dossier in full. CNN has also given vast amounts of airtime to analysts, former officials, and Democrat lawmakers pushing the Russia collusion narrative. It has also published a number of stories that advanced the narrative, including several that turned out to be false.
-
BuzzFeed — BuzzFeed first published the “pee dossier” in full — which released to the public unfounded accusations against President Trump, including the unverified claim that he hired prostitutes to urinate on a bed during a visit to Moscow in 2013. At the time of publish, the dossier remained “salacious and unverified,” in then-FBI Director James Comey’s own words.
-
The Washington Post — The Washington Post was on the forefront of publishing anonymously-sourced stories suggesting collusion between Russia and Trump campaign officials. It published the intelligence leak that former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn discussed sanctions with Russian ambassador Sergei Kislyak that led to his firing later. Flynn ended up pleading guilty to one count of lying. There were no collusion charges.
-
The New York Times — The New York Times published a front-page, top-of-the-page story on Inauguration Day suggesting that President-elect Trump’s associates had been “wiretapped.” Though the report admitted, “It is not clear whether the intercepted communications had anything to do with Mr. Trump’s campaign, or Mr. Trump himself,” it set the very inauguration of President Trump as part of a Russian conspiracy.
-
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) — Schiff, now the House Intelligence Committee chairman, has been the No. 1 pusher of the Russia collusion hoax in Congress. Absent any direct evidence of collusion, Schiff has argued for months that the evidence is “hiding in plain sight.” Schiff has also tried to fundraise off of the hoax.
-
Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA) — Lieu has been a close second to Schiff’s promotion of the Russia hoax in Congress. He once called for a pause in the “entire Trump agenda” until an investigation into the collusion ties was completed.
-
Benjamin Wittes — Wittes, a journalist who is close to former FBI Director James Comey, was a lead inciter on Twitter of the Russia hoax, infamously tweeting cannon gifs every time a new sensational report came out that advanced the Russia collusion narrative.
-
Louise Mensch — Mensch, a former British parliamentarian, has become a household name among the anti-Trump resistance in the U.S., with her fantastical tweets about “sealed indictments” and grand juries.
-
Hillary Clinton — Clinton, the day after losing the election to Trump, wanted to promote the idea that Comey’s reopening of the investigation into her emails and Russia led to her defeat, according to the book Shattered. “She wants to make sure all these narratives get spun the right way,” a Clinton ally told the book’s authors.
10. Robby Mook — Mook was the first Clinton campaign official to go on record suggesting there was collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, during an ABC News interview at the Democratic National Convention in July 2016, shortly after stolen DNC emails were released.
Breitbart News’ Joel Pollak contributed to this report.
Barbra Streisand says Michael Jackson’s accusers were ‘thrilled to be there’ and his ‘sexual needs were his sexual needs’
By GINA SALAMONE
Barbra Streisand, seen here with Michael Jackson at a 1986 event in Los Angeles, said the men accusing him of sexually abusing them as kids were "thrilled to be there." (Mark Avery)
Barbra Streisand is under fire for comments she made about two men accusing Michael Jackson of sexually assaulting them as children.
The legendary singer and actress said that Wade Robson and James Safechuck — whose allegations against the late King of Pop resurfaced in the recent documentary “Leaving Neverland" — “were thrilled to be there” and that what allegedly happened to them “didn’t kill them."
Streisand, 76, made the strange comments to British newspaper The Times in a piece out Friday, in which she also said that Jackson’s “sexual needs were his sexual needs.”
She says she “absolutely” believes the allegations of abuse by Robson and Safechuck, but puts more blame on their parents than The Gloved One.
“His sexual needs were his sexual needs, coming from whatever childhood he has or whatever DNA he has," Streisand told The Times. “You can say ‘molested,' but those children, as you heard say [grown-up Robson and Safechuck], they were thrilled to be there. They both married and they both have children, so it didn’t kill them.”
Streisand, who crossed paths with Jackson during their careers, added that she feels sorry for both the alleged victims and Jackson.
“I feel bad for the children,” she said. “I feel bad for him. I blame, I guess, the parents, who would allow their children to sleep with him. Why would Michael need these little children dressed like him and in the shoes and the dancing and the hats?”
Dan Reed, the director of “Leaving Neverland,” seemed shocked at Streisand’s comments. “'It didn’t kill them’ @BarbraStreisand did you really say that?!,'” Reed tweeted Friday.
Others were equally outraged.
“As a lifelong fan, I am deeply disappointed about your remarks regarding Michael Jackson,” a Twitter user going by Lisa Bee wrote. “I don’t understand how you could be so dismissive of the abuse that he inflicted and the damage that’s been done. It’s so unsympathetic to ALL victims of sexual abuse.”ign up for our newsletter
Ciao…..G’day…….
Helen & Moe Lauzier
Thus articles
that is all articles
This time, hopefully can provide benefits to you all. Okay, see you in another article post.
You are now reading the article the link address https://fairyforreference.blogspot.com/2019/03/www_23.html
0 Response to " "
Post a Comment