This is my weekly summary of news that the legacy media and Democrats have obfuscated for partisan political reasons. There were a LOT of stories this week that tightened up the sphincters of Democrats and their media allies!
1. Let’s start off with the hot topic of Ukraine:
There are still wide swaths of documentation kept under wraps inside government agencies like the State Department that could substantially alter the public’s understanding of what has happened in the U.S.-Ukraine relationships now at the heart of the impeachment probe. As House Democrats mull whether to pursue impeachment articles and the GOP-led Senate braces for a possible trial, here are 12 tranches of government documents that could benefit the public if President Trump ordered them released, and the questions these memos might answer.
- Daily intelligence reports from March through August 2019 on Ukraine’s new president Volodymyr Zelensky and his relationship with oligarchs and other key figures
- State Department memos detailing conversations between former U.S. Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch and former Ukrainian Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko
- State Department memos on U.S. funding given to the George Soros-backed group the Anti-Corruption Action Centre
- The transcripts of Joe Biden’s phone calls and meetings with Ukraine’s president and prime minister from April 2014 to January 2017 when Hunter Biden served on the board of the natural gas company Burisma Holdings
- All documents from an Office of Special Counsel whistleblower investigation into unusual energy transactions in Ukraine
- All FBI, CIA, Treasury Department and State Department documents concerning possible wrongdoing at Burisma Holdings
- All documents from 2015-16 concerning the decision by the State Department’s foreign aid funding arm, USAID, to pursue a joint project with Burisma Holdings
- All cables, memos and documents showing State Department’s dealings with Burisma Holding representatives in 2015 and 2016
- All State, CIA, FBI and DOJ documents concerning efforts by individual Ukrainian government officials to exert influence on the 2016 U.S. election, including an anti-Trump Op-Ed written in August 2016 by Ukraine’s ambassador to Washington or efforts to publicize allegations against Paul Manafort
Read the rest here. Absolutely right! And Solomon lays out the reasons for doing so in detail in his article. We need a REAL investigation into Obama regime corruption related to Ukraine. Time to blow the lid off!
2. Let’s stay with Ukraine and a timeline of Democrat-Ukraine collusion related to the 2016 elections, as reported by another independent journalist, Sharyl Atkisson:
The heads of two Senate committees are asking the FBI and the Department of Justice for records related to a reported scheme by Democrats to get “dirt” on the Trump campaign from Ukraine in 2016. According to reporting in Politico in 2017, the alleged efforts by Democrats and Ukraine to “sabotage” the Trump campaign in 2016 did impact the race, even though Trump won in the end. Both Politico and Yahoo News interviewed a Democratic National Committee (DNC) consultant named Alexandra Chalupa.
Democrats have repeatedly claimed the reporting on Chalupa, her work for the DNC, her meetings with Ukrainians, and her meetings with reporters in Ukraine and the U.S., is “debunked” and a “conspiracy theory.” In public accounts since the original news articles, Chalupa has claimed her role and intentions have been misrepresented. A Ukrainian-American, Chalupa reportedly acknowledged in a 2017 interview with Politico that she worked as a consultant for the Democratic National Committee during the 2016 campaign to publicly expose Trump campaign aide Paul Manafort’s links to pro-Russian politicians in Ukraine.
Read the rest here. The rest of her article is a timeline that details Ukrainian meddling in the 2016 elections. And the Democrats continue to claim that this “theory has been debunked”!
3. A member of The Squad has been exposed BIGLY in courtroom testimony:
Shocking testimony in a Florida court where a Qatari-born Canadian businessman, Alan Bender, told the court in a video statement that Representative Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) is a Qatari intelligence asset who has passed on sensitive information to the government of Qatar, which then passed it on to Iran. The testimony came during the trial of Sheikh Khalid bin Hamad al-Thani, the brother of the former emir of Qatar, Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani. He is accused of ordering his American bodyguard to murder two people, and of holding an American citizen hostage. Bender accused Omar of being bought by the Qatari security services and said she was getting money and support even before she ran for office.
Read the rest here. And the Democrats remain silent! If she was a Republican, she would have been forced to resign from Congress long ago.
4. The Democrats live and die by polls – in this case die!
The latest impeachment polling has come in from HuffPost, CNN, and Politico, and it proves Adam Schiff’s House hearings were a massive failure. This is not just a massive fail on Schiff’s part — it is also a massive media fail. Because, if you recall the last two weeks, Schiff’s kangaroo court was backed by billions and billions of dollars in corporate propaganda through the fake media, including far-left CNN, MSNBC, and even a number of lying morons on Fox News, like Chris Wallace and Andrew Napolitano. What’s more, as a means to give Schiff’s hoax the air of legitimacy, all the major networks broadcast the hearing live throughout the day, which included commentary from their own left-wing analysts.
Read the rest here. The Democrats’ impeachment show trials didn’t work out the way they thought they would work, did they? Will the push through with it? It’s going to be interesting to watch.
5. Despite Joe Biden’s best efforts (and those of the Democrat-run legacy media), this subject isn’t going to go away any time soon!
Despite the best efforts of the media, the underlying facts in the current impeachment effort must not go unnoticed. While Joe Biden was the sitting vice president, his son, Hunter Biden, received a very lucrative job as a board member of a corrupt Ukrainian natural gas company, despite not having any expertise in this area. During the time of Hunter’s employment, the activities of the company were investigated for corruption by the Ukrainian government. Joe Biden used his political power to threaten to withhold billions of dollars from the Ukrainian government if they did not fire the prosecutor who was, as it happened, investigating the allegedly corrupt company that had hired Hunter.
These are the hard and true facts, and they speak to the only quid pro quo we are certain of in this entire spectacle. There are even video tapes of Joe Biden bragging about the deal he made with the Ukrainians to get this prosecutor fired. Are these facts beyond investigation because Biden is a Democratic candidate for president? Should the Trump administration ignore his blatant quid pro quo because Hunter Biden has some kind of special privilege that no other American citizen possesses — the “my dad is the vice president” privilege?
Read the rest here. Do the Bidens get a pass? Not only no, but hell no! This transcends simple nepotism and needs to be thoroughly investigated and exposed.
6. Trouble brewing for Democrats in the 2020 election!
New polling released earlier this month from the New York Times Upshot with Siena College depicts a troubling picture for Democrats a year out from election day. Nearly two-thirds of Trump voters who supported Democratic congressional candidates in the 2018 midterms that flipped control of House to Democrats reported they would back the president over the three candidates currently leading in the Democratic primary, according to the Times. Further, the new polls show Trump maintaining or strengthening his edge in the six key battleground states that swung the election in the Republican’s favor, particularly among white working-class voters who flipped to Trump after eight years of backing President Barack Obama while Democrats continue to fall behind this critical voting bloc.
Read the rest here. An historical landslide is brewing while the Democrats fixate on their false impeachment narrative. So shall it be written; so shall it be done.
7. This pretty well nails the reason why public support for impeachment is dropping; the Democrats failed to produce ANY incriminating evidence of misconduct.
[N]ot one scintilla of evidence has been adduced that President Trump was seeking a false judgment on the conduct in Ukraine of former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter. He was asking for an investigation, not seeking to dictate the conclusion. Trump said to President Volodymyr Zelensky in his famous July 25 telephone call that it “looked horrible,” but was clear he was seeking a neutral judgment of whether there had been influence-peddling or other wrongdoing.
There is absolutely no legal or ethical problem with that, so this entire controversy has been even more fatuous and unfounded than it appears. The foreign service witnesses made evident throughout the unspeakable proceedings of the House Intelligence Committee their personal and policy animosity to Trump.
None of these histrionics and deluges of defamatory argument that have empurpled the airwaves have created the least suggestion of anything improper about President Trump having asked whether a former vice president and prominent candidate for president had or had not committed crimes in office involving a foreign country. The allegation that is the source of the impeachment inquiry is on its face, bunk. The president certainly made it clear that he wanted the Bidens investigated by the Ukraine government, and it is probably correct that this wish was in the combination of his motives for approving the payment of the money Congress had voted for Ukraine But that it was the primary consideration for approving such aid, the famous quid pro quo, has not been remotely proved. It has not even really been claimed by the Schiff witnesses. None of them claimed that it was the sole motive or the principal motive; the best they could do was surmise, almost entirely on the basis of hearsay, that it was among his motives. This has no probative value at all; it is utterly worthless evidence in the allegation of a crime.
Read the rest here. Releasing the transcripts of those two presidential phone calls destroyed the Democrats’ impeachment narrative before it even got started, and they’ve produced NOTHING in the Soviet-style star chamber hearings.
8. Obama hates Bernie, as detailed here. And enough to come out of hiding to comment on the Democrat choices for 2020. He doesn’t much like Biden, either.
A high profile piece in a political junkie establishment rag like Politico that claims extensive insights into Obama’s thinking is obviously a planted narrative by Obamaworld. The timing is right. Obama has made a sudden return to politics with his Democracy Alliance speech warning the Soros group against backing radicals. Deval Patrick was seen as his candidate, but the profile contains a claim that Obama told Patrick not to run. Is that really the case or, now that Patrick’s launch faltered, is Obama backing away from him?
Much of it is the usual fluff about Obama’s cerebral nature. But it’s safe to assume that the claims about his positions on candidates are real, not in that they represent the truth, but the truth that Obamaworld wants to put out. And the truth is that Obama hates Bernie. And hates him enough to block him. The article repeatedly disses Biden. That’s not a surprise. Obama never believed that Biden had it in him.
Read the rest here. I wonder what Obama’s game is? Get Michelle to run to deflect from the Spygate exposure that will tarnish his “no scandals legacy”? That’s laughable.
9. Examining the Crowdstrike “conspiracy theory” – that isn’t!
In the last few days, media talking heads have been saying the word “CrowdStrike” a lot, defining it as a wild conspiracy theory originating in Moscow. They were joined by Chris Wallace at Fox News, who informed us that president Trump and his ill-informed fans believe in a crazy idea that the DNC wasn’t hacked by the Russians but by some Ukrainian group named CrowdStrike that stole the DNC server and brought it to Ukraine, and that it was Ukraine that meddled in our 2016 election and not Russia.
Let’s look at the facts:
Fact 1. In 2016 the DNC hired the Ukrainian-owned firm CrowdStrike to analyze their server and investigate a data breach.
Fact 2. CrowdStrike experts determined that the culprit was Russia.
Fact 3. The FBI never received access to the DNC server, so the Russian connection was never officially confirmed and continues to be an allegation coming from the DNC and its Ukrainian-owned contractor.
Fact 4. Absent the official verdict, other theories continue to circulate, including the possibility that the theft was an inside job by a DNC employee, who simply copied the files to a USB drive and sent it to WikiLeaks.
None of these facts was ever disputed by anyone. The media largely ignored them except for the part about the Russian hackers, which boosted their own, now debunked, wild conspiracy theory that Trump was a Russian agent.
Now that Trump had asked the newly elected Ukrainian president Zelensky to look into CrowdStrike during that fateful July phone call, the media all at once started telling us that “CrowdStrike” is a code word for a conspiracy theory so insane that only Trump could believe in it, which is just more proof of how insane he is. But if Trump had really said what Mr. Wallace and the media claim, Ukrainians would be the first to call him on it and the impeachment would’ve been over by now. Instead, Ukrainians back Trump every step of the way.
Read the rest here. The article provides an excellent explanation of how the legacy media are twisting the Crowdstrike narrative just as they did the Russia hoax.
10. The Brits are in a quandary and are facing a very important election. This article measures their mood going in it:
Since the Brexit referendum, voters have been defined by two tribes—Leave and Remain—locked in a fight over whether Britain will exit the EU. Further evidence of a revolutionary mood comes in the person of Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour Party’s far-left leader, as well as in the rise of Nigel Farage’s insurgent Brexit Party. This lineup should suggest a dramatic, high-stakes General Election—and yet, with just over two weeks until polling day, the mood is more humdrum than one might expect.
When Corbyn clashed last week with Conservative leader Boris Johnson in the first head-to-head televised leaders’ debate in British history, the studio audience frequently laughed at the prime minister and the man hoping to replace him. Their insistences that they could be trusted, or that they were fit to lead the country, were not met with anger or outrage but derision.
That week, Lord Ashcroft, a Conservative peer and respected pollster, conducted a survey asking voters to list the stories and events from the campaign that they had noticed in recent days. Thirty-nine percent were unable to list any election-related news. In addition, less than half the electorate had heard of John McDonnell, Labour’s Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer since 2015 and the leading architect of the party’s radical economic agenda. Not even Brexit is presented as an opportunity for radical change or national rejuvenation. Rather it seems more like a chore, the political equivalent of taking the trash out.
Labour promises a renegotiation, followed by a second referendum, in which Corbyn has declared his neutrality. The central Tory message is that only Johnson can finish the job that the British people started.
Read the rest here. What will happen? Friends on the ground in the UK are most worried about voter fraud, including the British version of “ballot harvesting.” The average Brit is worried about the Corbyn lunacy that would descend if Labour wins out.
11. We’ll finish out this week with the report on that sneaky President Trump, who spent Thanksgiving Day with the troops in Afghanistan. Gotta love the man!
President Trump surprised troops and news outlets on Thanksgiving morning when he appeared in Afghanistan to thank troops for their service to the country and help serve a turkey dinner — but doing so required extreme security measures to ensure both safety and to prevent the word from getting out. “There’s nowhere I’d rather spend Thanksgiving than with the toughest fiercest warriors,” Trump told troops on the ground. “I’m here to say Happy Thanksgiving & thank you very much. As president of the United States I have no higher honor than serving as commander in chief.”
The plane landed in Afghanistan on a pitch-black runway, while the pool was only allowed to take pictures of Trump’s arrival from a nearby van. Accompanying Trump was White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham, Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien, Deputy Press Secretary Judd Deere, and Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo. Grisham said that only a tight circle of White House officials knew about the trip, and the White House even scheduled tweets to be sent out from the president’s account during the Internet blackout that he faced.
Read the rest here. Glad to see they’re taking his safety and security seriously, as that is something to worry about as the Democrats descend further into their TDS insanity.
Here are this week’s “honorable mention” articles:
The good news for @POTUS and his supporters continues to roll in: Americans are just beginning to learn some details about the Democrats’ corruption in Ukraine, the Schiff impeachment hearings fizzled bigly, and the polls are trending toward the President. And the legacy media are out there furiously spinning ahead of the IC IG report on FISA abuse ahead of its 9 December release. And who knows what US Attorney Durham is uncovering in his criminal probe into the origins of the 2016 counter-intel investigation? Good times!