Finally some answers are coming

The highly anticipated report of the investigation into alleged FISA abuses under the Obama administration has been delivered to U.S. Attorney General Barr, according to a statement released by the Inspector General on Friday.

Michael Horowitz made the announcement via a letter to congressional leaders.

“We have now begun the process of finalizing our report by providing a draft of our factual findings to the Department and FBI for classification determination and marking,” he said in the letter.

“As I noted in my June correspondence to you, my direction to our team has been to follow the evidence wherever it leads and to complete the review as quickly as possible,” continued Horowitz. “Consistent with this guidance, the team has reviewed over one million records and conducted over 100 interviews, including several of witnesses who only recently agreed to be interviewed.”

Allies of the president have accused members of the former administration of illegally surveilling the Trump campaign after the 2016 election.

Defenders of the Obama administration say the actions were legal and necessary as a part of the investigation into Russian interference in the election, and now unsubstantiated suspicions of collusion.

President Donald Trump began the very public firestorm himself when he tweeted in March 2017 the allegation that the Obama administration had ordered his “wires tapped” at Trump Tower just before the 2016 election.

In response to the tweet, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said at the time that it would be an enormous national scandal if proven true.

“The president of the United States is claiming that the former president of the United States ordered wiretapping of his campaign last year,” said Graham. “I don’t know if it’s true or not but if it is true, illegally, it would be the biggest political scandal since Watergate.”

Author: Carlos Garcia

Source: The Blaze: Breaking: Inspector General delivers draft report of FISA abuses under Obama to AG Barr

Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) exploded on Thursday night over an ad created by an Asian Republican that slammed her for being a socialist, suggesting without evidence that the woman who created the ad was a white supremacist.

Elizabeth Heng, who ran for U.S. Congress last year in California, ran the ad during the third Democratic presidential debate on ABC News.

“This is the face of socialism and ignorance,” the ad begins while showing Ocasio-Cortez’s face bursting into flames. “Does Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez know the horror of socialism? My father was minutes from death in Cambodia before a forced marriage saved his life. That’s socialism — forced obedience, starvation.”

“Mine is a face of freedom. My skin is not white. I’m not outrageous, racist, nor a socialist,” Heng continued. “I’m a Republican.”

New Faces GOP, a group created by Heng, tweeted the video with the following caption: “We have a choice: Will we let socialists like [AOC] be the face of our future? Or will a new generation of conservatives step up & lead us? We’re launching New Faces GOP to help identify & support the next generation of GOP leaders.”


“Heng, in a brief telephone interview Thursday night, said she spearheaded the PAC to give back to her community and fight against what she described as the extreme left wing of the Democratic Party that’s promoting socialism,” The Fresno Bee reported. “Heng said that her run for Congress last year convinced her that if the Republican Party doesn’t broaden its base to include millennials, women and people of color, socialism will ruin the country.”

Ocasio-Cortez exploded over the ad, tweeting: “Republicans are running TV ads setting pictures of me on fire to convince people they aren’t racist. Life is weird!”

“Know that this wasn’t an ad for young conservatives of color — that was the pretense,” Ocasio-Cortez claimed without evidence. “What you just watched was a love letter to the GOP’s white supremacist case.”

“GOP’s message: No policy, no facts, just displays of violence + corporations like [ABC] & Sinclair who amplify them,” Ocasio-Cortez misleadingly claimed. “They profit from burning my likeness on TV. But who pays for heightened security? Who answers the phones for the threats resulting from a violent, false ad?”

Heng responded to Ocasio-Cortez, tweeting: “Not Republicans. Me. Are you really calling me a racist [AOC]? I’m calling all Democrats out for supporting an evil ideology. Or are you just in Congress to hang out with celebrities and tweet out ridiculous ideas like the green new deal?”

“[AOC] response is the Democratic [P]arty in a nutshell,” Heng continued. “They are more offended by truthful words than the acts of their political ideology that has killed millions of innocent victims. I don’t care about [AOC’s] feelings — I care about stopping her lies about the lies of socialism.”

Heng writes the following about New Faces GOP on the organization’s website:

New Faces GOP was formed because our country is at risk of being destroyed by extreme, socialist Democrats who want to upend the American way of life. If we are going to compete on the battlefield of ideas, we must find new faces from the Republican Party stand up to lead.

We need candidate from all races, ethnicities, gender, or geography. Our party has the ideas and solutions to fight back extremism and its our goal to equip new leaders with the tools to win.

The Democrats message is weak at best, and downright laughable at worst — but they have dynamic, young messengers who relate to the next generation of voters.

Republicans, by contrast, have a winning message, and provide serious solutions to our nation’s most pressing problems — yet we don’t have messengers to deliver our platform in a way that engages meaningful segments of the population.

It was once said that if Republicans were trying to sell sushi, they would call it “cold, dead fish.” In other words, it doesn’t matter that Republicans have the right ideas if we are not able to market ourselves effectively.

And that’s why New Faces GOP was formed. Our mission is simple: Help elevate the next generation of Republicans so that we can not only survive as a party, but expand beyond the boundaries we’ve set for ourselves. Identify the new faces of the GOP who will lead us into tomorrow.

Author: Ryan Saavedra

Source: Daily Wire: Ocasio-Cortez Explodes Over Ad Aired During Debate That Slammed Her As A Socialist

President Donald Trump predicted on Thursday that one of the three Democratic presidential candidates who is currently polling as a top three contender will end up winning the party’s nomination for the presidency.

“Look, they all have their weaknesses and their strengths. I think that they’re very different – you certainly have a lot of different voices up there,” Trump responded when a reporter asked which Democratic presidential hopeful would be his strongest opponent.

Trump further anticipated that the Democratic nomination will likely end up going to former Vice President Joe Biden, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), or Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) since they have been consistently polling so far ahead of the rest of the primary field.

“But it would look to me like it would be Elizabeth Warren and it looks like Joe maybe will be able to get there, maybe not, I don’t know,” the president said. “And certainly Bernie is there, he’s number three. But I think that’s because they’re so far in the lead, the three of them.”

Accordingly, Biden has been outperforming both Warren and Sanders by an average of nearly 10 points. The former vice president has been consistently polling in the low-30s to mid-20s, with the progressive duo both hovering in the high-teens. While Warren has been gaining momentum, Sanders still has a razor-thin edge over his progressive counterpart by less than one percent, according to Real Clear Politics’ average polling data.

“And if you remember — I’m sure you forget my Republican primaries, but I went to the lead at the very beginning and stayed there,” Trump continued to reporters. “You know, if you don’t make a really major mistake, he should be able to make it, I would imagine Biden would be able to make it if he doesn’t make any major mistakes. We’ll see what happens.”

Trump’s remarks came as he was preparing to travel to Baltimore, Maryland to speak at the House Republican members’ annual retreat. Prior to boarding Marine One, he was asked about his expectations regarding the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) third primary debate, which would be kicking off over the next few hours.

“I don’t expect too much difference, I mean, you have three people who are leading,” Trump replied. “I sort of think that those three people are going to take it to the end – it’s going to be one of those three I think. But you never know in politics, do we? You know better than I, you never know in politics.”

The president also lamented the fact that he would not be able to watch the debate live due to his scheduling conflict with the retreat, but he noted that he would catch up on the event afterward.

“It’s too bad I’m going to miss it, I’m going to have to have it somehow taped,” Trump said. “I didn’t even tell them about that, so many it’s not that important, but it is important. Look, it’s going to be very interesting, I look forward to going home, I’m going to have to watch it as a rerun because many of you are coming to Baltimore with me.”

Author: Molly Prince

Source: Daily Wire: WATCH: Trump Makes A Prediction About Who Will Win The Democratic Nomination

Just 18 years after the terrible events of September 11, 2001, The FBI has agreed to provide a key piece of new information about alleged official Saudi involvement following intense efforts by the victims families.

While the alleged mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, remains at Guantamo Bay (trial date set for January 2021!), he opened the door in July to helping victims of the attacks in their lawsuit against Saudi Arabia if the U.S. government spares him the death penalty.

And, as The Wall Street Journal reports, victims’ families have urged the government to make more information public, telling President Trump in a letter recently that it would help them “finally learn the full truth and obtain justice from Saudi Arabia.”

The families had sought an unredacted copy of a four-page 2012 summary of an FBI inquiry into three people who may have assisted two of the hijackers in California in finding housing, obtaining driver’s licenses and other matters.

Two of the people, Fahad al-Thumairy and Omar al-Bayoumi, were linked to the Saudi government, according to FBI and congressional documents. The third person, whose name is redacted, is described in the summary as having tasked the other two with assisting the hijackers.

As a reminder, most of the attackers were from Saudi Arabia; Riyadh has denied complicity in the attacks.

In an odd admission, that appears to suggest they are withholding even more evidence, The FBI, citing the “exceptional nature of the case” said it would provide the name of one Saudi official the families’ had most wanted, but wouldn’t release any other information they sought.

Of course, this decision puts President Trump back in an awkward position of maintaining ties with his petrodollar partners who are buying all those arms while being forced to face realities about the Saudis’ behaviors.

Author: Tyler Durden

Source: Zero Hedge: FBI Finally Agrees To Name Saudi Official Who Helped 9/11 Attackers

Last night was yet another debate among 2020 Democratic hopefuls.

Americans had to suffer as these liberal elitists argued with each other over every issue imaginable. Some candidates attacked another over age. One made a bizarre promise to 10 Americans. But one thing was clear after the dust settled: Democrats are in bad shape.

I know you probably didn’t watch last night’s debates. I mean, there are so many other more important things you can do on a Thursday night. Like getting your teeth drilled. But ABC News hosted the third debates among rich, left-wing liberal elitists who think they know better than you about everything.

The event was supposed to give Democrats a chance to discuss important issues and show the country why they are better than President Trump. Instead, the party appeared childish as greedy candidates fought for attention.

Long-simmering policy disputes between Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and a slew of other candidates exploded into the open during Thursday night’s Democratic primary debate, as the candidates — often with raised voices — laid bare their fundamental disagreements on “Medicare-for-all,” immigration and more.

Intermittent efforts by some candidates to show unity and keep the heat on President Trump repeatedly failed, with most striving instead to score an aggressive debate “moment” onstage in Houston. [Source: Fox News]

At one point Mayor Pete tried to bring unity to the group, only to be torched by Julian Castro. It was like a high school brawl. Anyone that opened themselves up got punched by their rivals.

It really shows you how the Democrats are not working together on anything. Perhaps they were never united. That shouldn’t be a surprise. A party that exploits identity politics and social justice doesn’t know the meaning of working together. To many Democrats, public office is a get-rich-and-famous-quick scheme.

Naturally, trying to unite to oust a sitting president is impossible.

At one point, Andrew Yang made a weird promise to 10 random families.

“I’m going to do something unprecedented tonight,” Yang said in his opening statement. “My campaign will now give a freedom dividend of $1,000 a month for an entire year to 10 American families – someone watching this at home right now. If you believe that you can solve your own problems better than any politician go to Yang2020.com and tell us how $1,000 a month will do just that.” [Source: Fox News]

Uh… what? What does that have to do with debating the issues? And what about the 100 million other American families?

Joe Biden once again leaned on his time in Barack Obama’s administration. We know, Joe, you were vice president. Once upon a time, that would have made you a shoo-in. Maybe you should have run in 2016. Trying to milk you connection with Obama isn’t working. If that’s all you got, perhaps you should just throw in the towel now.

Castro pounced on Biden’s words, going as far as criticizing his age.

“I’m fulfilling the legacy of Barack Obama, and you’re not,” Castro said… “You just said two minutes ago they would have to buy in. Are you forgetting what you said two minutes ago?” Castro asked. Some commentators said Castro’s jab was an improper, thinly veiled reference to Biden’s age. [Source: Fox News]

Pretty ugly stuff. Never did it seem that the candidates got along or would want to work together. Everyone was out for him or herself, just looking for that moment to outshine the rest. You have to keep in mind that these are all members of the same party. And they’re digging into each other like it’s a street brawl.

(Noticeably not discussed was Trump’s soaring economy and House Democrats’ pathetic impeachment attempts. Touchy subjects, Democrats?)

These candidates don’t seem to respect their own colleagues or care about how bad this makes them look to Americans. They are just thirsty for the nom—no matter the cost.

Makes you wonder what kind of leaders they’ve been—or will be. None of them deserve to be president.

Former Texas representative and current Democratic presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke told people watching the debate on Thursday, Sept. 12: “Hell yes! we’re gonna take your AR-15, your AK-47.”

O’Rourke has endorsed confiscating guns, though he claimed this week that such a plan would not require police officers going “door to door.”

Pressed on how he’d enforce the plan if it were passed, he replied, “How do you—how do we enforce any law? There’s a significant reliance on people complying with the law. You know that a law is not created in a vacuum.”

O’Rourke’s declaration on Thursday clashed with his own words from last year when he said during an appearance on KFYO: “If you purchased that AR-15 if you own it, keep it. Continue to use it responsibly.”

Former Rep. Beto O’Rourke takes the stage for the start of the 2020 Democratic presidential debate in Houston, Texas on Sept. 12, 2019. (Jonathan Bachman/Reuters)
From left, Democratic presidential candidates Sen. Amy Klobuchar, (D-Minn.), Sen. Cory Booker, (D-N.J.), South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg, Sen. Bernie Sanders, (I-Vt.), former vice president Joe Biden, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, (D-Mass.), Sen. Kamala Harris, (D-Calif.), entrepreneur Andrew Yang, former Texas Rep. Beto O’Rourke and former Housing Secretary Julian Castro are introduced for the Democratic presidential primary debate hosted by ABC on the campus of Texas Southern University in Houston on Sept. 12, 2019. (AP Photo/Eric Gay)

At the debate, O’Rourke was answering a question on whether he’d force Americans to give up their guns.

“I am if it’s a weapon that was designed to kill people on the battlefield. If the high-impact, high-velocity round, when it hits your body shreds everything inside of your body—because it was designed to do that—so that you would bleed to death on a battlefield. And not be able to get up and kill one of our soldiers,” he said.

He recalled the mother of a 15-year-old girl he met in Odessa, Texas, after the mass shooting there. The girl was shot by a man wielding an AR-15.

“That mother watched her bleed to death over the course of an hour because so many other people were shot by that AR-15 in Odessa and Midland, there weren’t enough ambulances to get to them in time,” he said.

That’s when he said the “hell yes” phrase, adding, “We’re not going to allow it to be used against our fellow Americans anymore.”

Follow Zachary on Twitter: @zackstieber

Author: Zachary Stieber

Source: The Epoch Times: Beto O’Rourke: ‘Hell Yes We’re Gonna Take Your AR-15, Your AK-47’

General Michael Flynn’s attorneys demanded documents from seven meetings connected to the Russia investigation and accused the DOJ of concealing evidence from Flynn and suppressing evidence of General Flynn’s innocence.

The Gateway Pundit reported back in January on the US intelligence hiding exculpatory evidence from Flynn.

Attorney Sidney Powell also revealed in court disclosures that CIA asset Joseph Mifsud was spying on Flynn back in 2015.

Powell is asking for any evidence of Joseph Mifsud’s presence and involvement in engaging or reporting on Mr. Flynn and Mifsud’s presence at the Russia Today dinner in Moscow back in December 2015.

It was already known that Deep State spy Stephan Halper set up Flynn by placing the General Flynn next to Putin at the RT dinner.

As we reported earlier the attorney for Michael Flynn confirmed he was Western Intelligence and NOT a Russian asset as it was claimed by the hacks on the Mueller team in their report.

According to Mr. Mifsud’s attorneys their client was working for the CIA and was NOT a Russian operative as reported by the Mueller witch hunt team of liars.

Mueller and his band of angry Democrats lied in their final report on operative Joseph Mifsud.

Mifsud was NOT a Russian operative as the Mueller report claimed he was.

Mifsud worked for Western intelligence — and now his attorney has confirmed this!

Author: Jim Hoft

Source: The Gateway Pundit: Michael Flynn’s Attorneys Drop Bomb on Deep State – Suggest CIA Operative Was Spying on Gen. Flynn back in 2015

This time, it was personal.

Tom Homan, the former acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, has a hard-nosed, no-nonsense manner when it comes to illegal immigration that will never make him popular to the modern Democratic Party.

But his tangle on Wednesday with Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz was one for the books.

The clash started when Wasserman Schultz, a former chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, decided to attack Homan’s testimony before the House Oversight Committee’s subcommittee on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties.

“I think it’s important to really make sure that the jingoistic, bigoted testimony of Mr. Homan is called out as nearly completely untrue, as being an outrage, and as a former official directing the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, he should know better,” she said.

Then Wasserman Schultz, after delivering her remarks in deliberately insulting terms, refused to give Homan a chance to respond and instead went on to question other witnesses, according to Fox News.

It wasn’t until Republican Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio had his turn at questioning witnesses that Homan got a chance to hit back at Wasserman Schultz’s insinuations.

And it was just as stark.

“If I can respond to the earlier remark from Wasserman Schultz,” he said.

“I’ve forgotten more about this issue than you’ll ever know. So if you say my testimony is inaccurate, it’s wrong. Everything I said here is accurate. Bottom line.

“If you want to go toe to toe, I’m here. I’m here on my own time to speak to the American people about what’s false and what’s fact.”

Check out a Fox News video of the fireworks here:

Wednesday’s hearing was to consider the Trump administration’s new policy that stopped deferring deportation of individuals because of medical hardships, according to a Fox preview of the event Wednesday morning.

After Homan got his chance to respond to Wasserman Schultz, the congresswoman delivered a mixed message of her own, claiming she was more than ready to tangle with Homan, but she apparently had other priorities.

“I’m happy to go toe to toe with you Mr. Homan,” Wasserman Schultz said. “I’m happy to do that any day.”

“Then you gotta let me respond to your question rather than dropping a bomb and running away,” Homan retorted.

Wasserman Schultz’s explanation?

“It was my time,” she said.

Sure, it was her time — and if a congressional Democrat chooses to use her time to abuse a career public servant as “jingoistic” and “bigoted,” it’s her privilege.

If she wants to dismiss an expert’s opinion about illegal immigration as being “nearly completely untrue,” it’s her right.

But the fact that she wouldn’t use that time to grant him the courtesy of an actual response should tell Americans everything they need to know about the Democratic Party of 2019.

This time it was personal.

And to repurpose a popular phrase these days: Their time is up.

Author: Joe Saunders

Source: Western Journal: Ex-ICE Director Homan Hammers Wasserman Schultz at Hearing: ‘I’ve Forgotten More About This Issue Than You’ll Ever Know’

President Donald Trump’s campaign is set to spring for a giant anti-socialism banner along with a plane to fly it over Houston, just before Thursday night’s Democratic debate.

The banner and flight will reportedly cost around $7,500 and it will fly from 2 p.m. until 6 p.m., just an hour before the start of the debate.

The banner will read, “Socialism Will Kill Houston’s Economy” above a plea to “Vote Trump 2020,” according to a rendition provided to ABC News by the Trump campaign.

Bernie Sanders (L) and Elizabeth Warren hug after participating in the first round of the second Democratic primary debate of the 2020 presidential campaign season in Detroit, Michigan. (Photo by Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images)

“Every single Democrat candidate has job killing, economy crushing policies that won’t work for America. Team Trump is here to remind them and let everyone in Houston know what a complete disaster Democrats are for America,” deputy communications director Erin Perrine told the network in a Wednesday statement.

Trump and Republicans have made a practice of pointing out Democrats’ socialistic policy positions, and evidence suggests it could be an effective tactic. While 50 percent of Americans view socialism in a negative light, only 18 percent of all Americans say they view socialism positively, according to a Wall Street Journal poll conducted in May.

The ad campaign will also include full-page print ads directed at Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, and Julian Castro, ABC reported.

Author: Scott Morefield

Source: Daily Caller: Giant Anti-Socialism Banner To Fly Over Houston Before Democratic Debate, Paid For By The Trump Campaign

Last night, we reported that President Trump had decided to delay a 5% increase in tariffs on Chinese goods by two weeks, supposedly out of respect for Beijing and its celebration of 70 years of Communist Party rule on Oct. 1. Trump’s decision came less than a day after China waived 25% tariffs on 16 types of US goods to try and “sweeten” the deal ahead of trade talks next month.

Now, in the latest tit-for-tat deescalation of trade tensions, Bloomberg reports that Beijing is considering whether to permit imports of American agricultural products including soybeans and pork, a move that would further alleviate trade tensions while bolstering support for Trump in the midwestern farm states that comprise a sizable chunk of his base. Foodstuffs and farm products were notably not included in the 16 goods exempted from tariffs earlier this week. According to the Ministry of Commerce, Chinese companies have started asking about prices for US soybeans and pork, a sign that they could restart imports in the near future.

Reopening the door to US soybean imports would come at a critical time for Beijing, which this week announced that it would start allowing imports of soy meal from Argentina to offset the drop in US raw soybeans. China halted imports of US farm products in August as trade talks broke down and President Trump ordered more tariffs on Chinese goods.

As fallout from the trade war hits the US and Chinese economies, pressure for a deal is rising.

Chinese officials welcomed Trump’s decision to postpone US tariffs, Ministry of Commerce spokesman Gao Feng said at a press briefing on Thursday. Gao noted that mid-level teams of trade negotiators will soon meet to prepare for higher level talks.

China has been struggling with a weak yuan, factory-price deflation and falling exports. Meanwhile, in the US, factory activity unexpectedly contracted in August for the first time in three years, highlighting the impact of slowing global growth and the trade war.

“Trump’s goodwill gesture suggests that the trade war is starting to bite and the US may be more eager to close a deal,” said Chua Hak Bin, an economist at Maybank Kim Eng Research Pte. in Singapore. “The clock is ticking and Trump’s approval ratings are sliding, with manufacturing now in recession.”

Still, despite the latest round of goodwill gestures, the two sides remain far apart on fundamental issues: Beijing insists that the US must drop all trade war tariffs as part of any deal, while Washington is demanding concessions on IP and state subsidies that Beijing has so far refused.

WSJ reported Thursday morning that Beijing is hoping to narrow the scope of negotiations with the US to only focus on trade matters, and put thorny national security issues on a separate track. Senior Chinese officials hope this approach will offer a path out of the current impasse, before a team of mid-level Chinese officials heads to Washington next week to prepare for the next round of high-level talks.

Will these ‘goodwill’ gestures lead to a breakthrough toward a deal? Or will they prove to be the latest in a series of false starts as the trade war nears the 18th month mark?

Author: Tyler Durden

Source: Zerohedge: Beijing Considers Re-Authorizing Imports Of US Agricultural Products In Latest ‘Goodwill’ Gesture

Ad Blocker Detected!

Advertisements fund this website. Please disable your adblocking software or whitelist our website.
Thank You!