Category Archives: Russia and the 2016 election

Admiral Mike Rogers & The Dog That Didn’t Bark

The phrase “the dog that didn’t bark” originates from a Sherlock Holmes story (“The Adventure of Silver Blaze”) – the indispensable clue coming in the form of something that would normally have occurred – but didn’t.

Which brings us to the relentless effort on the part of the Democrat Party (and its Deep State overlords) to remove President Trump from office, and thus undo the election of 2016. Since that time the Progressive forces visible to the public – the so-called mainstream media, the minions of the Democrat Party – have fed the public with allegations of “Russian collusion,” emoluments clause violations, 25th Amendment removal, and “obstruction of justice.” In spite of their all-out efforts, that poisonous Progressive tree has failed to produce impeachment fruit.

The Democrats’ motto appears to be: “if at first you don’t succeed, and second you don’t succeed, and third you don’t succeed, coup, coup, again.”

We now find ourselves being hauled out on to yet another limb of that tree – an “impeachment investigation” (a/k/a “impeachment inquiry”) borne of neither House vote nor due process – purportedly to investigate not “Russian collusion,” but “Ukrainian coercion.”

An obvious question becomes was there ever any good faith belief on the part of Democrats that President Trump had committed any bad acts, much less any serious enough to support a bona fide impeachment and removal from office?

Or has this all been an unprecedented, a downright evil attempt to remove a duly-elected President from office using trumped-up charges (pun intended) – a de facto attempt at pulling off a political coup to overthrow the rightful President of the United States?

It is submitted for your consideration that in answer to that question, “a dog that didn’t bark” provides the telltale clue.

Continue reading

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Nancy Pelosi’s Constitutional Process Crimes

Cross-posted from www.trevorloudon.com

“It’s a pun!” the King added in an offended tone, and everybody laughed, “Let the jury consider their verdict,” the King said, for about the twentieth time that day.

“No, no!” said the Queen. “Sentence first — verdict afterwards.”

“Stuff and nonsense!” said Alice loudly. “The idea of having the sentence first!”

“Hold your tongue!” said the Queen, turning purple.

“I won’t!” said Alice.

“Off with her head!” the Queen shouted at the top of her voice. Nobody moved.

“Who cares for you?” said Alice, (she had grown to her full size by this time.) “You’re nothing but a pack of cards!”

– Alice in Wonderland (Lewis Carroll); Chapter XII, Alice’s Evidence

We need not recount here the myriad ways that Nancy Pelosi’s so-called “impeachment investigation” is a Constitutional travesty –  perusal of the non-“mainstream” media and White House Counsel Pat Cippolone’s  letter to the House more than suffice.

The “impeachment investigation” is structured as a Congressional hit-squad, not a bona fide inquiry; it makes even Stalin’s show trials look legitimate in comparison, for at least those were held in public – something the Lavrentiy Beria-resembling Adam Schiff dares not do.

During the Mueller circus we witnessed various folks being charged with “process crimes” totally unrelated to “Russian collusion” – apparently driven by Andrew Weissmann’s attempts to squeeze (false) implicating testimony (against Trump) from the targets, or his retribution if they didn’t succumb to said attempts.

It can be argued that the lack of due process, lack of fealty to procedural precedent, and overall lack integrity, means that by design this “impeachment inquiry” is itself  a series of “process crimes” against our Constitution, committed by those who have designed it, and those who are executing it.

Further, those who are “in the know” about what’s going on, and are in a position to do something about it, or at least to blow the whistle about it, are accomplices to these “process crimes.”

After all, if the Democrats were genuine in their professed belief that impeachable offenses were committed by President Trump – yet also remained loyal to the letter and spirit of our history and our Constitution – they would be sensitive to the serious portends of even commencing such an effort.

So if this was a legitimate effort the Democrats would have made sure that the design of, and conduct of the process would be unimpeachable.

This they have not done. Quite the opposite.  This “investigation” demonstrates not only the Democrats’ duplicity, but also their desperation.

For you see, extremely serious crimes were committed against the Trump campaign; so now the Democrats and Deep State have placed themselves into a position of (as they see it) having to cover up “by any means necessary.”

Continue reading

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

DOJ Inspector General referred Comey for prosecution but AG Barr refused to prosecute

Inspector General (IG) Michael Horowitz is the chief watchdog of the Department of Justice (DOJ).

Katie Pavlich reports for Townhall that on Thursday morning, August 29, 2019, DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz released an 83-page long report on fired FBI Director James Comey‘s misconduct — that Comey set a “dangerous precedent” by purposefully leaking to the media confidential FBI memos about conversations with President Trump for personal and political gain, so as to launch the Special Counsel investigation into the 2016 presidential election on then-presidential candidate Donald Trump’s alleged (but wholly without evidence) collusion with the Russians. During sworn congressional testimony in 2017, Comey himself admitted that he’d purposely leaked the confidential memos to a friend, who then gave them to the New York Times.

The IG’s report specifically addresses a number of claims made by Comey that the memos he leaked were “personal documents.” But the IG concluded the memos, which were written on an official FBI computer while Comey was working in his official capacity as FBI director, belong to the FBI. Even worse, after Comey was fired he held onto the memos, which was against FBI protocol. From the report:

We conclude that the Memos were official FBI records, rather than Comey’s personal documents.  Accordingly, after his removal as FBI Director, Comey violated applicable policies and his Employment Agreement by failing to either surrender his copies of Memos 2, 4, 6, and 7 to the FBI or seek authorization to retain them; by releasing official FBI information and records to third parties without authorization; and by failing to immediately alert the FBI about his disclosures to his personal attorneys once he became aware in June 2017 that Memo 2 contained six words (four of which were names of foreign countries mentioned by the President) that the FBI had determined were classified at the “CONFIDENTIAL” level.

Comey told the Office of the Inspector General that he considered Memos 2 through 7 to be his personal documents, rather than official FBI records.  He said he viewed these Memos as “a personal aide-mémoire,” “  like [his] diary” or   “like [his] notes,” which contained his “recollection[s]” of his conversations with President Trump. Comey further stated that he kept Memos 2, 4, 6, and 7 in a personal safe at home because he believed the documents were personal records rather than FBI records. Comey’s characterization of the Memos as personal records finds no support in the law and is wholly incompatible with the plain language of the statutes, regulations, and policies defining Federal records, and the terms of Comey’s FBI Employment Agreement.  

We conclude that the Memos are official FBI records as defined by statute, regulations, Department and FBI policies, and Comey’s FBI Employment Agreement. Because they are official FBI records, Comey was required to handle the Memos in compliance with all applicable Department and FBI policies and the terms of his Employment Agreement.

The IG report concluded that by retaining and leaking official FBI documents, including confidential documents, James Comey  violated:

  1. The DOJ and policies pertaining to the retention, handling, and dissemination of FBI records and information; and
  2. The requirements of Comey’s FBI Employment Agreement.

In the words of the Inspector General’s report:

[A]fter his removal as FBI Director two months later, Comey provided a copy of Memo 4, which Comey had kept without authorization, to Richman with instructions to share the contents with a reporter for The New York Times. Memo 4 included information that was related to both the FBI’s ongoing investigation of Flynn and, by Comey’s own account, information that he believed and alleged constituted evidence of an attempt to obstruct the ongoing Flynn investigation; later that same day, The New York Times published an article about Memo 4 entitled, “Comey Memo Says Trump Asked Him to End Flynn Investigation.”

The responsibility to protect sensitive law enforcement information falls in large part to the employees of the FBI who have access to it through their daily duties. On occasion, some of these employees may disagree with decisions by prosecutors, judges, or higher ranking FBI and Department officials about the actions to take or not take in criminal and counterintelligence matters. They may even, in some situations, distrust the legitimacy of those supervisory, prosecutorial, or judicial decisions. But even when these employees believe that their most strongly-held personal convictions might be served by an unauthorized disclosure, the FBI depends on them not to disclose sensitive information.Former Director Comey failed to live up to this responsibility. By not safeguarding sensitive information obtained during the course of his FBI employment, and by using it to create public pressure for official action, Comey set a dangerous example for the over 35,000 current FBI employees—and the many thousands more former FBI employees—who similarly have access to or knowledge of non-public information. Comey said he was compelled to take these actions “if I love this country…and I love the Department of Justice, and I love the FBI.” However, were current or former FBI employees to follow the former Director’s example and disclose sensitive information in service of their own strongly held personal convictions, the FBI would be unable to dispatch its law enforcement duties properly, as Comey himself noted in his March 20, 2017 congressional testimony. Comey expressed a similar concern to President Trump, according to Memo 4, in discussing leaks of FBI information, telling Trump that the FBI’s ability to conduct its work is compromised “if people run around telling the press what we do.” This is no doubt part of the reason why Comey’s closest advisors used the words “surprised,” “stunned,” “shocked,” and “disappointment” to describe their reactions to learning what Comey had done.

In a country built on the rule of law, it is of utmost importance that all FBI employees adhere to Department and FBI policies, particularly when confronted by what appear to be extraordinary circumstances or compelling personal convictions. Comey had several other lawful options available to him to advocate for the appointment of a Special Counsel, which he told us was his goal in making the disclosure. What was not permitted was the unauthorized disclosure of sensitive investigative information, obtained during the course of FBI employment, in order to achieve a personally desired outcome.

Incredibly, despite the DOJ Inspector General’s findings, Comey will not be prosecuted.

About a month before the release of the Inspector General’s report, The Hill had reported that “Inspector General (IG) Michael Horowitz’s team referred Comey for possible prosecution under the classified information protection laws, but Department of Justice (DOJ) prosecutors working for Attorney General William Barr reportedly have decided to decline prosecution,” ostensibly because the prosecutors “did not believe they had enough evidence of Comey’s intent to violate the law, according to multiple sources.”

A source told The Hill that prosecutors “working for” Barr were particularly concerned with one memo that Comey had leaked to a friend for publication by the media contained information that the FBI subsequently classified at the lowest level of “confidential” only after Comey had transmitted the information. And so the Attorney General’s office decided not to prosecute Comey so as not to “look petty and vindictive,”

After he learned that Attorney General Barr will not prosecute him, James Comey then completely misrepresented and twisted the Inspector General’s report into what it was not.

In a tweet on August 29, 2019, Comey crowed that the DOJ Inspector General found no evidence that Comey or his attorneys released any of the classified information contained in any of the memos to members of the media. Comey accused President Trump of giving the public “bad information”. Then Comey had the chutzpah to demand “a public apology from those who defamed me” or “a quick message with a ‘sorry we lied about you’ would be nice.”

Justice really is dead in America.

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Did the FBI stage the 2017 Las Vegas mass shooting?

The term “false flag” has its origins in naval warfare where a flag other than the belligerent’s true battle flag is used as a ruse de guerre.

As the term is used in contemporary America, a false flag is an event that is  contrived and manipulated by the authorities to achieve a covert agenda, e.g., gun control. The intended result is a “rallying around the flag” effect, wherein an inflamed “useful idiot” populace is mobilized to support the covert agenda. The public is given an untruthful version of the event by government and/or the media, whether it be about the perpetrator(s) and/or victim(s). That real people actually died or were injured doesn’t mean the event isn’t a false flag, so long as the event meets the two defining and necessary conditions for a false flag incident:

  1. The public is given an untruthful version of the event.
  2. The purpose of which is to achieve some covert agenda.

We are told that on Sunday night, Oct. 1, 2017, in Las Vegas, Nevada, 64-year-old retired accountant and multimillionaire Stephen Craig Paddock fired an automatic weapon from his room on the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay hotel at an outdoor Route 91 Harvest country western music concert across the street, killing 58 people and wounding more than 500.

If the Las Vegas shooting massacre was a false flag, it would mean there are people in government who could kill innocent people and inflict trauma on the American people to achieve their ends. That, in turn, means that our government is in the hands of people so diabolical, calling them psychopaths does not begin to describe what they are. That is a frightening thought.

But it is a thought not entirely alien to America’s Founding Fathers who fashioned a polity based on a view of human nature as inherently selfish, and of government as a necessary evil that must be constrained and delimited. To quote James Madison in The Federalist No. 51:

What is government itself but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external or internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: You must first enable the government to control the governed, and in the next place oblige it to control itself.

Even with checks and balances in place, the U.S. government is known to have undertaken and planned false flags. An example is the Gulf of Tonkin incident on August 4, 1964. We were told that without provocation, the North Vietnamese attacked the U.S.S. Maddox and U.S.S. Turner Joy destroyers. Congress took the bait and passed a joint resolution pre-approving military deployments without a declaration of war, thereby giving President Lyndon Johnson a free ticket to wage war in Vietnam. It turned out no Vietnamese boats were even in the gulf at the time of the alleged attack.

Then there was Operation Northwoods, a false flag of stunning scope, audacity and deviousness which was proposed in 1962 by the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff and approved by the head of every branch of the armed forces. Government operatives were to undertake acts of terrorism against U.S. military and civilian targets in Guantanamo Bay, Miami, other Florida cities, and even in Washington, D.C. Hostile acts including sinking U.S. ships, having fake Cuban MIGs attack a U. S. Air Force aircraft, hijacking and shooting down a chartered civil airliner, and gunning down civilians in the streets would be blamed on the Fidel Castro government, which would be used as pretexts for a “military intervention” against Cuba. Thankfully, President John F. Kennedy rejected the proposals. See “Operation Northwoods: A true U.S. government conspiracy for those who mock conspiracy theories“.

In the case of the 2017 Las Vegas shooting massacre, some question whether the FBI, part of the Deep State, had staged the shootings.

To begin, about 16 months before the shooting, in a report for Business Insider on June 9, 2016, news intern Caroline Simon sounded the alarm that “The FBI is ‘manufacturing terrorism cases’ on a greater scale than ever before“. She wrote:

The FBI has ramped up its use of sting operations in terrorism cases, dispatching undercover agents to pose as jihadists and ensnare Americans suspected of backing ISIS, aka the Islamic State, Daesh, or ISIL . . . .

In many cases, agents will seek out people who have somehow demonstrated radical views, and then coax them into plotting an act of terrorism — often providing weapons and money. Before the suspects can carry out their plans, though, they’re arrested.

But critics say that the FBI’s tactics serve to entrap only individuals who would never have committed any violence without the government’s instigation.

“They’re manufacturing terrorism cases,” Michael German, a former undercover agent with the FBI who now researches national-security law at New York University’s Brennan Center for Justice, told The Times . . . .

Stephen Downs, an attorney . . . said that the FBI often targets particularly vulnerable people, such as those with mental disabilities . . . who are genuinely psychotic, who are taking medication . . . .

On October 2, 2017, the morning after the night of the Las Vegas mass shooting, right on cue ISIS claimed responsibility for the shooting massacre. As reported by the New York Post, ISIS’s news agency Amaq said, “The Las Vegas attack was carried out by a soldier of the Islamic State” and that “The Las Vegas attacker converted to Islam a few months ago.”

The FBI quickly dismissed ISIS’s claim of responsibility.

On the same day as ISIS’s claim, FBI Special Agent in Charge Aaron Rouse said at a news conference there is no evidence that Stephen Paddock was associated with any international militant group and that “We have determined at this point no connection to an international terrorist organization.”

The FBI’s alacrity in dismissing ISIS’s claim of responsibility was particularly impressive given the fact that the Bureau, at the time more than eight months into its investigation of Donald Trump’s alleged collusion with the Russians to sabotage the 2016 presidential election, still could not definitively tell the American people that the allegation is fictive.

Adding to the confusion, on the same day of ISIS’s claim of responsibility and the FBI’s quick dismissal of the claim, InfoWars reported that:

The Las Vegas shooter didn’t commit suicide as the mainstream media is reporting, but was killed by a FBI hostage rescue team who also found Antifa literature in his hotel room, according to a source linked to the team.

The FBI team took the suspect out after he opened fired on them, according to the source, and afterwards the team found photos taken in the Middle East of a woman linked to the suspect, 64-year-old Stephen Paddock.

Do these look like the same man to you?

A “deep-level intelligence insider” also told Infowars the mass shooting was “very, very strange”:

  • The shooter, Stephen Paddock, was “an average 64-year-old white male with no criminal record.”
  • Paddock’s brother described him as an average person who was not into firearms and never owned that many guns. But Paddock’s Mandalay Bay hotel room was filled with guns, including several long guns. Where did those guns come from?
  • The attack clearly had been “pre-planned” and the target group, a country-music concert, “was specifically chosen” — a group that represents traditional America, patriotic, God-fearing, pro-Second amendment, pro-Constitution and anti-NWO (New World Order) Americans whom Obama derisively described as “clinging to their guns and religion.”

Noting the fortuitous coincidence that “the mainstream media was already in Las Vegas to cover the OJ Simpson release right before the shooting occurred,” Infowars concluded that the possibility of the Las Vegas shooting being a false flag must now be considered.

On October 5, 2017, four days after the Las Vegas mass shooting, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange referenced Caroline Simon’s Business Insider report when he implied in a since deleted tweet that the shooting had been staged by the FBI. Assange wrote:

Almost all “terror” plots are created by the FBI as part of its business model.

What is the business of the FBI? Extracting tax. What does it need to do that? A stable threat. Prob? Real terrorists are sporadic & make FBI look weak. Solution? Make them.

Assange ended his tweet with a link to Caroline Simon’s Business Insider report that “The FBI is ‘manufacturing terrorism cases’ on a greater scale than ever before.”

See also:

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Lindsey Graham claims we’ll soon know the ugly truth about Russian probe & it will be “damning” for intelligence communities

Well, if you got the goods sir, produce them NOW. Because I’m not going to hold my breath.

From Daily Mail: Republican senator Lindsey Graham said Sunday that the Inspector General’s report on how the investigation into ties between the Trump campaign and Russia began will be ‘ugly and damning’ for the Department of Justice.

During an interview with Fox News, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Graham said the Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s report is ‘going to be ugly and damning regarding the DOJ handling of the Russian probe.’

Graham said that Horowitz’s report is now expected to be released in the coming weeks and he is determined to have the report released so that the American people can find out what it says about the Russia probe.

When asked why the report, which was expected to have been submitted months ago, was delayed for so long, Graham said that ‘Every time you turn around you find something new.’

He added that ‘Mr. Horowitz is doing a very in-depth dive’ into how the FBI made use of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in an effort to obtain a warrant allowing them to monitor Trump’s former campaign adviser Carter Page.

Graham said that when Horowitz submits his report, the DOJ will evaluate it for classified information, but that he wants to ‘declassify as much as possible. ‘I want the American public to hear the story, I want all this information to come out,’ Graham said. ‘I don’t want people to believe what I say about it, I want them to read for themselves how bad it was.’

Graham said he wants ‘people to see how off the rails this investigation got’ and that he wants ‘people to be held accountable.’

‘I am patient,’ Graham said. ‘I am not in a hurry, I want to do it right.’

Graham said that he wanted George Papadopoulos, a former Trump campaign staffer who pleaded guilty to making false claims to the FBI, to testify in front of his Senate Judiciary Committee after Horowitz’s report is released.

The senator said he believes that Papadopoulos’ interview transcripts reveal that he was ‘clearly’ not working with the Russians as has been claimed.

Papadopoulos is said to have been responsible for initiating the Russia probe by telling an Australian diplomat that he had heard that Russia had damaging information about Hillary Clinton. The diplomat was said to have alerted US officials about what the ex-campaign staffer said.

Graham also noted that he believe the FBI’s application for a FISA warrant was a ‘fraud on the court’ because the FBI relied in Christopher Steele’s dossier to get the warrant, even though Steele was, what Graham called, ‘an unreliable informant’ who disliked Trump.

Read the whole story here.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Hollyweirdo Alec Baldwin says Russians killed Jeffrey Epstein

Last Friday morning, we were told that just a day after the unsealing of documents revealing the names of prominent Demonrat politicians, convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein had committed suicide-by-hanging in his prison cell in Manhattan Correctional Center.

“At 50, everyone has the face he deserves.” -George Orwell

Last night, from the Hilaria and Alec Baldwin Foundation account he runs with his wife, Trump-hater actor Alec Baldwin, 61, tweeted that “The Russians killed Epstein. They’re in charge of everything now.”

“AlecBaldwin” should be a new synonym for insanity.

See also “Singer David Crosby believes President Trump is under the control of Russia

~Eowyn

Drudge Report has gone to the dark side. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Singer David Crosby believes President Trump is under the control of Russia

Libtard David Crosby, formerly of the group Crosby, Stills & Nash, was given the opportunity to write an opinion piece for the Daily Beast. In his screed, he goes on to state that President Trump is under the control of Putin because of the “very real possibility that Putin has incriminating evidence with which to blackmail the president.”

From his rant:

It seems clear to me that Russia may well have some kind of info they are using to blackmail Trump with—“kompromat” as the Russians call it. It could be the alleged “pee tape,” could be some truth to the whispers that Trump has been laundering Russian mob money for at least 20 years through his New York real estate deals, stashing illegal money in multimillion-dollar apartments and condos all over town.

Could just be the fact he lied about working on a deal for Trump Tower Moscow while he was running to be President of the United States in 2016. This could be why Trump is so completely under the control of Russia and so utterly disloyal to the United States. This could be why the Republican Party is blocking the passage of laws to protect our elections from outside influence, because that’s how they installed Trump, and that’s how they intend to win again in 2020.”

Read his full tirade here.

Although Mr. Crosby has no proof of actual crimes committed by President Trump, we DO have proof of crimes committed by this libtard. From Wikipedia:

“In 1982, after being convicted of several drugs and weapons offenses, Crosby spent nine months in a Texas state prison. The drug charges were related to possession of heroin and cocaine.

In 1985, Crosby was arrested for drunken driving, a hit-and-run driving accident, and possession of a concealed pistol and drug paraphernalia. Crosby was arrested after driving into a fence in a Marin County suburb, where officers found a .45-caliber pistol and cocaine in his car.

On March 7, 2004, Crosby was charged with criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, illegal possession of a hunting knife, illegal possession of ammunition, and illegal possession of about one ounce of marijuana. Crosby left said items behind in his hotel room. Authorities said a “hotel employee searched the suitcase for identification and found about an ounce of marijuana, rolling papers, two knives and a .45-caliber pistol. Mr. Crosby was arrested when he returned to the hotel to pick up his bag.” After spending 12 hours in jail, he was released on $3,500 bail. On July 4, 2004, he pleaded guilty to attempted criminal possession of a weapon, was fined $5,000 and given no jail time. Prosecutors did not seek a more severe penalty on the weapons charge because the pistol was registered in California and was stowed safely in his luggage when it was found. A charge of unlawful possession of marijuana was dismissed. Crosby was discharged by the court on condition that he pay his fine and not get arrested again.”

Since Mr. Crosby is very familiar with the criminal justice system and the concept of “innocent until proven guilty,” I suggest he offer some more verifiable proof for his claims. Even better, present the proof to Congress. STAT.

Or maybe he should just up his meds for his TDS infection.

h/t Breitbart
DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Live feed of Robert Mueller testifying before Congress

Special prosecutor Robert Mueller is testifying before two House panels about the report on his two-year, $25 million investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, which found no evidence of any Trump collusion.

But that hasn’t stopped the mentally-ill Demonrat Left from their obsessive insistence of a Trump-Russia conspiracy. Nothing will.

Watch the live feed of the hearing at the New York Post, here.

Your comments are welcome!

~Eowyn

Drudge Report has gone to the dark side. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

 

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Just what we need: Celebrities lecturing us about the “truth about Trump collusion”

I made it through about a minute of this video. That’s about all I can take of self-righteous celebrities with TDS.

And if the “collusion” is there, why isn’t President Trump impeached yet? Why the wait? Huh?

Expect the delusional hysterics to continue well until 2020…

DCG

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Hillary Clinton calls herself ‘Madam President’ in commencement speech

It is now more than 2½ years since she lost the 2016 presidential election to Donald John Trump, but Hillary Clinton is still bitterly in denial and still coveting the presidency.

Last Wednesday, May 29, 2019, Hillary was the keynote speaker at the commencement of more than 2,400 Hunter College students in New York City’s Madison Square Garden.

Hunter College is one of the constituent colleges of the public, i.e., taxpayer-funded City University of New York (CUNY), in Manhattan, NYC.

Hillary began her speech by referring to Hunter College President Jennifer J. Raab’s “Madam President” title to imply that she (Hillary Clinton) should be President of the United States. She said:

“Thank you, thank you so much. I have to say this has been one of the most inspiring heartfelt commencements that I’ve ever experienced, and I am thrilled, I’m thrilled to be a part of it today. [Turning to look at Hunter College president Raab] ‘Madam President’ — that has a nice ring to it!”

Hillary then used the rest of her speech to attack President Trump and to continue the fiction that Russia had interfered in the 2016 election.

You can hear/watch her entire speech here, if you insist on torturing yourself.

Jennifer J. Raab, 62, was appointed president of Hunter College in 2001 by then NY Mayor Giuliani, amid controversy and accusations of intimidation of the CUNY Board of Trustees because of Raab’s lack of doctoral degree (she has a law degree from Harvard). Raab is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.

H/t Lophatt

See also:

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
error0