Author

Chris Enloe

Browsing

‘Mike, come and take it’

The National Rifle Association on Sunday issued a fierce response to Michael Bloomberg’s misleading gun control ad that aired during the Super Bowl.

The misleading ad claimed that 2,900 children die from gun violence every year. However, as Washington Free Beacon reporter Stephen Gutowski noted, almost half of those “children” are actually adults ages 18 and 19. In fact, the ad merely cites misleading data from Bloomberg’s gun control group, Everytown for Gun Safety.

In response, the NRA issued an ad of its own blasting Bloomberg’s gun control push. The ad includes direct responses from numerous Second Amendment supporters.

“As the mother of a 3-year-old little boy, my family means everything to me. As a woman, I believe that the best way to protect my family is with a firearm. And Michael Bloomberg will never take that right away from me,” one woman says. “I’m the gun lobby and I am not afraid of Michael Bloomberg. Mike, come and take it.”

“It’s very important to me to keep my home secure and that is why there is a gun on the left side of my bed and the right side. Mr. Bloomberg, your home is protected by armed guards at all times. Why can’t I exercise my Second Amendment rights to protect mine? I am not afraid of Michael Bloomberg,” another woman says.

“Mike Bloomberg suggests that disarming minority males like myself will keep us alive. But I have news for you: Mike Bloomberg is a white billionaire who has no place in telling me how I can defend myself or my loved ones,” one man says. “And Mike, as an African-American male that you want to disarm, I promise you will never take away my Second Amendment. I am not afraid of Mike Bloomberg.”

“As a woman, it’s important that I’m able to defend myself. As a mother, I would like to pass that on to my daughter so that she knows she never has to be defenseless. Mike Bloomberg, think about the women in your life. Are you okay with the fact that your policies could leave them defenseless?” another woman says. “Michael Bloomberg will never take that right away my right to defend myself. I am not afraid of Michael Bloomberg.”

In an official statement, the NRA told Fox News: “It is regrettable but not surprising that salient facts didn’t make the ad. Bloomberg cherry-picked aspects of the story to push his agenda. Bloomberg pushes for confiscation of guns and stripping regular Americans of our right to self-defense while he enjoys armed security 24/7. He sees America as his kingdom, and the rest of us as his peasants.”

Despite the pushback, Bloomberg campaign spokeswoman Julie Wood defended the ad.

“Ask any grieving parent whose 18- or 19-year-old son or daughter was shot and killed, and they will tell you they lost a child,” she said. “There are simply too many of these deaths, and Mike has a plan to prevent them with common-sense gun safety laws.”

Author: Chris Enloe

Source: The Blaze: NRA fires back at Michael Bloomberg’s misleading gun control ad with powerful ad of its own

‘If the Senate calls witnesses, I will ask for votes on all these next week’

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) is preparing to file subpoena requests for multiple new witnesses to testify in President Donald Trump’s Senate impeachment trial.

According to Politico, Hawley is targeting House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, the Ukraine whistleblower, among others.

“I have drafted motions to subpoena Adam Schiff, the ‘whistleblower,’ Hunter Biden, and Joe Biden to testify. If the Senate calls witnesses, I will ask for votes on all these next week,” Hawley announced on Twitter.

From Politico:

Hawley’s strategy harmonizes with plans from GOP Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas and Rand Paul of Kentucky to force votes to hear from Hunter Biden, the former vice president’s son who was on the board of Ukrainian energy company Burisma.

Their tactics are intended to convince a handful of senators to sink a vote next week to consider new evidence in President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial. Trump’s attempt to pressure Ukraine to investigate the Bidens is at the heart of the impeachment case against the president.

If Hawley is able to issue the subpoenas, he would also seek communications related to Schiff and his staff, the whistleblower, the House impeachment managers, and Joe Biden’s admitted effort to oust a former top Ukrainian prosecutor, among other communications.

Hawley needs just a simple majority vote to seek the evidence and issue the subpoenas. The tactic would also undercut the Democratic narrative that Republicans are unwilling to consider new evidence and witnesses during Trump’s Senate trial.

Author: Chris Enloe

Source: The Blaze: GOP senator prepares subpoenas for Adam Schiff, whistleblower, and the Bidens to testify in Senate trial

Not going as Democrats planned

The Democratic push to impeach President Donald Trump has increased his public support, a new poll has found.

The Gallup survey, released Monday, found that a majority of Americans — 51 percent to 46 percent — do not want the Senate to convict Trump and remove him from office.

Support or opposition for Trump’s possible conviction predictably falls down partisan lines with more Democrats opposing conviction than Republicans supporting it.

However, support for conviction is higher than it was during Bill Clinton’s impeachment, Gallup noted. Several Gallup polls conducted in early 1999 found that an average of just 33 percent of Americans supported Clinton’s removal from office.

Still, Gallup found that the implications of the Trump impeachment saga are clear: it is “increasing” his public support.

From Gallup:

As was the case for Clinton, the impeachment of Trump has not had a noticeably negative effect on his popular support. In fact, for both presidents, impeachment had the opposite effect of increasing their public approval. Clinton registered a personal best 73% approval rating immediately after being impeached.

Meanwhile, the Gallup survey found that Trump’s job approval rating is holding steady at 44 percent, up from a low of 39 percent last fall when the impeachment saga began.

Author: Chris Enloe

Source: The Blaze: New poll shows impeachment is helping President Trump ahead of 2020 election — not hurting him

‘I’m going to be punished for that? And that’s when I knew’

New Jersey Rep. Jeff Van Drew officially joined the Republican Party last week, revealing on Sunday the “final straw” that forced his defection from the Democratic Party.

Speaking with Fox News host Maria Bartiromo on “Sunday Morning Futures,” Van Drew said he decided to leave the Democratic Party after a local Democratic Party county chairman in his congressional district threatened political consequences if he voted against impeaching President Donald Trump.

“It made me think for all the years that I’ve worked so hard and tried to give so much not only to the party but to everybody… and it all boils down to one vote that I may have my own individual opinion on one vote and that’s not going to be allowed,” Van Drew said.

“And I’m going to be punished for that? And that’s when I knew,” he explained.

Regarding impeachment, Van Drew said he “feels good” because he believes that he did the “honorable thing” by voting against impeaching the president.

“I feel that I did what was right for me and right for the country,” he said, adding that impeachment is “weak,” “thin,” and “doesn’t really mean anything much to the American people.”

“It’s been a long, dark shadow on our country,” Van Drew explained. “We are there to work for the American people and not to have constant political bickering.”

Van Drew officially joined the Republican Party last Thursday, one day after voting against impeachment. During an announcement at the White House, Van Drew pledged his “undying support” for Trump.

Author: Chris Enloe

Source: The Blaze: Jeff Van Drew breaks silence after joining GOP, reveals ‘final straw’ that forced him to leave Democrats

‘I read the document and there was absolutely nothing concerning to me’

The Democrat-led House impeachment inquiry targeting President Donald Trump is driving the national discourse thanks in part to the amount of coverage the mainstream media is dedicating to it.

But what do actual voters think of the impeachment probe?

NBC News recently talked with voters in three early primary states — New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Minnesota — and the sentiment was clear.

  • Jim Baird of Minnesota: “I think it’s a waste of time and they’re a bunch of little kids fighting and not accomplishing what the hell they’re elected for.”
  • Gray Chynoweth of New Hampshire: “I think we have a system of checks and balances. And the way it should work is that, you know, the House and the Senate should do what is set out in the Constitution.
  • Tracy Veillette of South Carolina: “I read the document and there was absolutely nothing concerning to me from one president to another. It was absolutely appropriate.”

The segment aired on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday. The voters prove what National Review’s Rich Lowry said during the segment: that although impeachment is driving the national discourse in the media, the average American is not as concerned with impeachment.

“People out there don’t talk about impeachment a lot at any events. It doesn’t come up,” Lowry said.

Not only are average voters not as concerned with impeachment as the media, but voters in swing states also continue to oppose the impeachment of the president and his removal from office.

Recent analysis by the New York Times showed that while voters in the six tightest 2016 swing states generally approve of the impeachment inquiry, they do not favor impeaching Trump and removing him from office, 53 percent to 43 percent. Voters nationally, however, continue to favor Trump’s impeachment and removal from office.

Author: Chris Enloe

Source: The Blaze: NBC asks voters how they feel about impeachment — and they make it clear: ‘Bunch of little kids’

‘Then Nancy Pelosi does become president’

On MSNBC’s “AM Joy” Saturday, host Joy Reid and her panel of commentators envisioned a scenario in which House Speaker Nancy Pelosi becomes president.

Reid claimed that even if President Donald Trump is impeached and removed from office, nothing would change in Washington because Vice President Mike would become head of state, which would keep “all of the conspirators in place.”

Jill Wine-Banks, one of the prosecutors during the Watergate scandal, then answered Reid’s call, predicting how to completely remove Trump and his political legacy from office, thereby manufacturing Pelosi’s “House of Cards”-style ascension to the White House.

Will-Banks’ solution? Impeach Pence first, then demand that Trump does not appoint a new vice president prior to his own impeachment.

“You could impeach Pence first. The problem is that Donald Trump then has to name his replacement,” she said. “But I think that maybe a deal could be struck where he was told, if you don’t make a replacement, then Nancy Pelosi does become president.”

As House Speaker, Pelosi is second in the line of presidential succession.

However, a rise to the Oval Office from her current position would be nearly impossible, and would require the level of constitutional-bending and political manipulation that Will-Banks suggests.

Author: Chris Enloe

Source: The Blaze: MSNBC panel concocts plan to make Nancy Pelosi president by ousting Trump AND Pence

And there you have it

The New York Times reported Monday that President Donald Trump recently “pushed” Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison to help Attorney General William Barr gather information for an ongoing Justice Department investigation in hopes to “discredit” Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation.

The newspaper characterized Trump’s alleged request as “using high-level diplomacy to advance his personal political interests” — the same allegation Democrats and the media have made about Trump’s controversial July conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

But a letter surfaced later Monday discrediting the Times’ reporting.

Image via Twitter @KerrieYaxley

The letter — first reported by Australian reporter Kerrie Yaxley — shows Australia proactively reached out to Barr via Scot Hockey, Australia’s ambassador to the U.S., in May to offer assistance in the Justice Department’s investigation into the origins of the FBI’s Russia investigation.

The letter states:

I refer to President Trump’s announcement on 24 May that you will investigate the origins of the Federal Bureau of Investigations probe into Russian links to the 2016 US election.

I note that the President referred to Australia, the United Kingdom and the Ukraine as potential stakeholders. Moreover, I note that he has declassified intelligence material to support your investigation.

The Australian Government will use its best endeavors to support your efforts in this matter. While Australia’s former High Commissioner to the United Kingdom, The Hon. Alexander Downer, is no longer employed by the government, we stand ready to provide you with all the relevant information to support your inquiries.

The Acting White House Chief of Staff, The Honorable Michael Mulvaney, has been copied on this letter.

According to Fox News, Hockey wrote the letter after Trump told reporters he would direct Barr to seek assistance from other countries in the investigation, which is being led by U.S. Attorney John Durham.

A top Australian diplomat further corroborated Monday that it was Australia that initiated contact with Barr regarding the investigation.

“After the president said what he said — we initiated the contact. There was no pressure — we acted in order to help,” the diplomat told Fox News.

Indeed, the Justice Department told Fox News that “countries have been helpful” in the DOJ’s investigation.

“There was no pressing required,” the DOJ official said.

Author: Chris Enloe

Source: The Blaze: Letter emerges from top Australian official refuting New York Times’ latest Trump scoop

‘Most prominently, the Speaker of the House has been emphatic…’

The Justice Department told a federal judge on Friday the House Judiciary Committee should not be granted access to secret grand jury material collected during Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation because Democratic lawmakers do not agree on why they need the files.

The DOJ’s response comes nearly two months after the committee filed a petition in court arguing they needed full, unredacted access to the materials in order to determine whether to move forward with an impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump.

According to the DOJ, the committee — chaired by Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) — has “come nowhere close to demonstrating a particularized need” for the grand jury material.

In fact, the DOJ argued that conflicting language from Democratic leaders undermine their central claim for needing the secret files, citing statements from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-N.Y.).

“Most prominently, the Speaker of the House has been emphatic that the investigation is not a true impeachment proceeding,” the DOJ wrote.

“And the House Majority Leader had even explained that branding the Committee’s proceeding as ‘impeachment’ is a simply a device to enhance the Committee’s legal arguments in this and other courts,” the agency explained.

The DOJ went on to say:

As the Committee’s Chairman has stressed—and as the Speaker of the House and the House Majority Leader both reiterated this week—the purpose of its investigation is to assess numerous possible remedial measures, including censure, articles of impeachment, legislation, Constitutional amendments, and more.

What may come of this investigation—if anything—remains unknown and unpredictable.

Because congressional impeachment proceedings “are not ‘judicial proceedings’ under the plain and ordinary meaning of that term,” the DOJ said secrecy rules governing federal grand juries must be upheld.

Author: Chris Enloe

Source: The Blaze: DOJ court filing shows how Nancy Pelosi sabotaged Dem efforts to obtain secret Mueller files for impeachment probe

‘The one who scares me the most in the general is…’

Although Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) is not the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination, she is reportedly the candidate whom the Trump campaign fears most.

“The one who scares me the most in the general is Kamala Harris,” a top Trump campaign official told the Washington Times this week.

“The top candidates are all flawed candidates, but the least flawed is Kamala Harris,” the official, who the Times described as a “key player” in the campaign, explained.

Unfortunately for Harris, mediocre debate performances have tempered her campaign’s momentum through the summer months after surging through the spring. Harris launched her campaign amid widespread Democratic enthusiasm in January, drawing a campaign kickoff crowd of roughly 20,000 people — a larger crowd than what then-Sen. Barack Obama drew in 2008 when launching his presidential campaign.

Harris currently stands fourth among the crowded field of Democrats behind front-runner Joe Biden, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).

However, Harris stands to gain the most through the fall and into the primary season early next year.

Enthusiasm for Biden has already begun waning over continues gaffes and his political history. Meanwhile, although Warren is surging, both she and Sanders are seen as far-left socialists. Both candidates will be a tough sell for most Americans who are much closer to the political center than the far-left.

Harris is perhaps the most moderate top Democrat competing for the nomination, which will undoubtedly help her when Democrats hit the polls next year. In fact, Harris admitted last month that part of her campaign strategy thus far has included holding close to her campaign promises.

“I’m not churning out plans like a factory because it is really important to me that any plan that I’m prepared to implement is actually doable,” she said.

Indeed, if America learned anything in 2016, it is that the most politically-savvy candidate will be victorious despite what polls predict.

Author: Chris Enloe

Source: The Blaze: Top Trump campaign official reveals which 2020 Dem the Trump campaign fears most

‘You are a vicious unethical monster’

Controversial Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) suggested Friday that “Israeli occupation” was to blame after Palestinian terrorists murdered a 17-year-old Jewish girl hiking with her family in the West Bank.

The girl, Rina Shnerb, was killed when an improvised explosive device detonated at a popular tourist site outside the West Bank settlement of Dolev. Shnerb was pronounced dead at the scene, while her father and brother sustained life-threatening injuries and were airlifted out of the area.

From Haaretz:

According to the military, it remains unclear whether the charge was hidden at the site of the explosion or thrown at the family that was hiking there. The army has ruled out the possibility that the charge was hurled out of a moving vehicle and said it appeared the device was home-made.

Defense sources said that the explosive device that was used was large, forceful and required advanced knowledge and skill to assemble. However, it has yet to be determined if the incident is tied to a major organization.

It wasn’t immediately clear who exactly carried out the brutal attack, but Hamas politburo chief Ismail Haniyeh commended whoever did, calling the actions “heroic,” Haaretz reported.

What did Tlaib say?

In response, Tlaib said her “heart goes out to Rina’s family,” then immediately turned to seemingly blame the attack on “Israeli occupation.”

Tlaib was heavily criticized over her response.

One person replied, “This is vile! Have you no shame? How dare you blame the murder of this beautiful teenage Israeli girl #RinaShnerb on the ‘occupation’? Can you not just blame the Palestinian terrorists that took her young life? This only underscores Israel was right to deny you entry!”

“You actually blame the victim here. You are a vicious unethical monster,” another critic said.

Author: Chris Enloe

Source: The Blaze: Palestinian terrorists murder Jewish teenager. Rashida Tlaib rushes to blame ‘Israeli occupation.’

Ad Blocker Detected!

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